



lA-%„^'id 

















0' 








y.' * 




£ 



C, y " > 



. K^>* <#:^,V" V^v* 



> *%^ 



f ^ \> \v* 




• * ^ 
^ P ^ 








v x % * * « , % ° ' * V N 



.$ % 















.0° v\Ln»J*. ^ 



>> c 






^ °^ 



f °- 









1 # 






^ 






* * 7 



<, 



^ <2* 











V v 









^„ 





cP\\L 

:P* 



G- , 



l^'V^ G°\.^^ 





* * & 




f0~ S S "' 4 '^I 

^jieOB^*' ^ 



T,s^\ag v ^ ", 



^.^ 



z 



// '<& 



RECOMMENDATIONS 



THIS WORK. 

It is with great pleasure that I hear that a repub- 
lication of Gray's " Priesthood" is demanded by the 
Christian community ; and the right to do so, is 
cheerfully given my esteemed friend, the Publisher. 
The work is one on which my late revered and be- 
loved father spent much of his time, talent, and ac- 
quirements ; and one which retained his own appro- 
bation even to his last days. From his clerical friends 
he never received but one opinion, and that was 
uniform commendation and satisfaction. My rela- 
tionship forbids me saying of the work what I would 
rejoice to say under other circumstances. The pre- 
liminary and subsequent remarks, to the main ques- 
tion, will meet generally the views of the evangelical 
public. With the full conviction that every mind 
that reads the solution of that hitherto perplexed and 
perplexing question, will be entirely relieved and 
delighted, I have only to wish, that the Publisher 
may receive an ample remuneration for his risk in 
issuing an edition. 

C. G. McLEAN. 

January 26, 1844. 

(123) 



RECOMMENDATIONS. 

New York, December 26, 1843. 

I have just learned, my dear sir, that you are 
about to republish the work of the late Dr. James 
Gray, on the " Priesthood of Melchisedec." You 
will allow me to express the hope that it may be 
widely circulated. Of all the productions of the 
Dr/s gifted mind (and few minds were more gifted), 
this is certainly the ablest. Indeed, I have long re- 
garded it as containing the only satisfactory exposi- 
tion of the passage of Scripture which it professedly 
analyzes. 

The late Dr. Mason, when delivering a course of 
lectures upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, on coming 
to the beginning of the 7th chapter, read to his con- 
gregation the volume in question ; remarking, that it 
was better than any thing he could prepare for them. 
I will only add, that the style of the work is fine, 
many parts of it indeed are of surprising brilliancy, 
and all of it is marked by that sprightliness, vigour, 
and energy, for which the writer was distinguished. 

j. Mcelroy. 

To William Stewart, Hagerstown, Md. 

The undersigned has pleasure in expressing his 

entire concurrence in the estimate of Dr. Gray's work 

on the " Priesthood," stated above by Dr. McElroy. 

Dr. Gray was a man of genius, and one of the most 

eloquent and attractive writers of his day. In the 

little work on the Priesthood, he has given, perhaps, 

the only satisfactory clue to the right understanding 

of a very difficult subject. 

JOHN KNOX. 

New York, December 26, 1843. 

(124) 



RECOMMENDATIONS. 



From the Weekly Messenger, the organ of the German Re- 
formed Church, 

" Gray's Priesthood." — A new edition of the above work has 
been recently published by Mr. William Stewart, Bookseller, 
of Hagerstown, Md., for which favour he justly deserves to be 
liberally patronised by a religious community. Dr. Gray is 
acknowledgedly an able and lucid writer. He has succeeded in 
the above work, in throwing much light upon a difficult, but 
interesting subject. The coincidence between the priesthood 
of Jesus Christ and Melchisedec is affirmed in the word of God, 
particularly in Paul's epistle to the Hebrews ; and the particu- 
lars in which this coincidence consists, are clearly set forth by 
Dr. Gray. We have read the work ourselves with much profit, 
and cheerfully recommend it to all who feel interested in the 
important subject of which it treats. There is appended to the 
work a brief but interesting sketch of the life of Jesus Christ, 
from his birth until the commencement of his public ministry, 
The whole book comprises about 160 duodecimo pages. 



From the Lutheran Observer, one of the organs of the Lutheran 
Church. 

The late Dr. James Gray was unquestionably a very superior 
man ; as a close, lucid and powerful reasoner, and an eloquent 
writer, his high rank is well known to the religious public and 
readily conceded by the liberal of all parties. His work on the 
" Priesthood" is thought to be one of the most able of his pro- 
ductions, and is said to have retained his own sanction to his 
latest hours. The late Dr. Mason, of New York, so highly 



RECOMMENDATIONS. 

approved of it that he read it to his congregation, remarking that 
it was better than anything he could prepare for them on the 7th 
chapter to the Hebrews. Such a work needs not our humble 
commendation. Bating a few sentiments, to which we are not 
prepared unconditionally to subscribe, it may be regarded as one 
of the most ably written works of the day, while it furnishes 
the best solution of the intricate question respecting Melchisedec 
that we have met with. It is entitled to an attentive perusal, 
and will amply repay the reader for the cost of purchase and the 
time bestowed upon its examination. 



From the Christian Observer, one of the organs of the Presby- 
terian Church. 

This is a new edition of a very able work, which has rarely 
been seen on the Bookseller's shelves for several years. It con- 
tains the result of patient study and thought on an important 
subject, in an elaborate exposition of Genesis xiv., Psalm ex., 
and the 5th, 6th, and 7th chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
To those who would understand whatever is revealed of the 
order of Christ's priesthood, on which they rest their hopes of 
salvation, the discussion will be interesting. As the fruit of 
intellectual labour, it is commended in decided terms. Dr. 
McElroy remarks, that, " of all the productions of the author's 
gifted mind, (and few minds were more gifted,) this is certainly 
the ablest. Indeed, I have long regarded it as containing the 
only satisfactory exposition of the passages of Scripture which 
it professedly analyses." The late Dr. Mason read it to his con- 
gregation, when delivering a course of lectures on the Epistle 
to the Hebrews. 









i 



DISSERTATION 



ON THE 



COINCIDENCE BETWEEN THE 

PRIESTHOODS 

OF 

JESUS CHEIST AND MELCHISEDEC, 

IN THREE PARTS; 

IN WHICH THE PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE RELATING TO THAT SUBJECT, IN 

THE XIV. CHAPTER OF GENESIS, THE XC. PSALM, THE V. VI. VII. 

CHAPTERS OF THE EPIST. TO THE HEBREWS, ARE EXPLAINED. 

TOGETHER WITH 

A SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 



BY JAMES GRAY, D.D. 



TTvevna^iKolg irvevfxa'JiKa <rvyicplvov']£g. 1 Cor. ii. 13. 



WILLIAM STEWART, HAGERSTOWN, MD. 

JAMES M. CAMPBELL, 

PHILADELPHIA. 

1845. 



25- 

■ 



Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1844, by 

WILLIAM STEWART, 

in the clerk's office of the district court of the United States in and for 
the eastern district of Pennsylvania. 




tmp96 



027951 




ADVERTISEMENT. 



Agreeably to a regulation of the Associate Re- 
formed Church, the Presbytery of Philadelphia, on the 
15th November 1805, assigned the author the ex. 
Psalm, as the subject of a critical discourse. The 
chief difficulty in that psalm is the parallel between 

c the priesthood of Melchisedec and that of Messiah. 
He had before that time read various hypotheses on 
the subject, without being satisfied with any of thern ; 
and without that careful and patient examination of 

r x the scriptures, which is necessary to obtain satisfaction 
on such a point. He was now obliged to study the 
psalm and the apostle's commentary on it. At a sub- 
sequent meeting of the Presbytery, the substance of the 
following dissertation was read. It did not produce 
much conviction ; and was but feebly supported by 
the author, who, though strongly impressed with the 
correctness of the views exhibited, was neither dog- 
matically certain, nor prepared to repel detailed ob- 
jections. During a part of the years 1808, and 1809, 
he was engaged in expounding the epistle to the He- 
brews to his congregation, and was not displeased with 

(3) 



vo 



IV ADVERTISEMENT. 

the necessity imposed on him of analysing, with what 
accuracy he could, the apostle's phraseology and ar- 
gument respecting Melchisedec. The consequence 
was that every doubt evanished. 

When the discourse was moulded into its present 
form, the intention was to publish it in a periodical pa- 
per; with which view it was divided into parts. But 
the extent to which the matter spread, and the injury 
which a continous discussion suffers from being cut up 
into shreds, induced the adoption of the present mode 
of publication. During the composition, but chiefly 
since, he has examined every author he could procure, 
who has treated the subject : in one or other of whom 
he found most of the ideas here communicated, some 
apparently thrown out at random, others stated for 
refutation. The only thing he could refer to, as af- 
fording any support to his general views, is a passage 
in the third volume of Wolfius's Curse Philologicae. 

Care has been taken that the Hebrew and Greek 
quotations should create as little embarrassment to 
the English reader as possible. 



CONTENTS 

TO THE 

DISSERTATION, &c. 



PART I. 

Importance of the subject page 7 

Passages of scripture where Melchisedec is mentioned 11 

That the priesthood of Jesus is the subject of the epistle 
to the Hebrews ib. 

Analysis of the passage beginning at the 11th verse of 

the v. chapter and continuing to the end of the vi. 20 

An inquiry whether there is any reason to believe that 
the apostle has kept back any thing he knew about 
Melchisedec 27 

An inquiry whether the scriptures respecting Melchise- 
dec be mysterious 28 

PART II. 

Topics stated for discussion 32 

I. The divine origin of the priesthoods of Melchisedec, 

Aaron and Jesus ib. 

The term JH3, Cohen, explained 38 

Of the priests of Egypt 40 

Of Jethro, priest of Midian 42 

Of the priests mentioned, Exod. xix. 22 ib. 

Of the promise Exod. xix. 6. "Ye shall be unto me a 

kingdom of priests," &c 43 

Conclusion that Melchisedec was the first that ever 

enjoyed the priest's office 44 

Further proof ib. 

1* (5) 



VI CONTENTS. 

II. The sense in which Jesus is said to be a priest after 

the order of Melchisedec, and after the order of 

Aaron 48 

The idea of the term order as it occurs in this subject, 
ascertained 50 

III. The reason why David spoke of Messiah as a priest 
after the order of Melchisedec, and not after the 
order of Aaron 53 

The reasons why Paul found it necessary to argue this 
subject so pertinaciously with the Jews 57 

PART III. 

Topics stated 65 

I. Melchisedec was not an angel 66 

Nor the Holy Ghost lb. 

Nor the son of God 67 

He was a man 69 

An inquiry what particular man he was 70 

II. Explanation of the name Melchisedec 71 

Explanation of the name Salem 72 

III. The meaning of Heb. vii. 3, viz. " without father," 
&c. considered 74 

Hypotheses on the subject examined, viz. that Melchise- 
dec was without human descent, without predecessor 
or successor in office, without human genealogy . . 77 

That the passage relates wholly to Levitical genealogy 84 

IV. Of the duration of Melchisedec's priesthood ; expla- 
nation of Heb. vii. 3, 8, 15, 16, 17, 23, 24 94 

Meaning of thtyb, and Big aiwvoc, and sig to disuse 95 

V. The dignity of Melchisedec's priesthood 103 

VI. Comparison of Jesus with Melchisedec 108 

Conclusion 110 



A DISSERTATION, &c. 



PART L 

That Melchisedec and Jesus Christ are 
related as type and antitype is sufficiently 
apparent ; but it is not so obvious what are the 
coincident points of the typical analogy. It 
is believed that Christians are not generally 
satisfied on this subject. And yet the want of 
satisfaction is not attributable to the want of 
authors or of investigation : for few themes of 
theological criticism have been discussed so 
much, or have engaged a larger portion of 
talent and learning ; and none has given birth 
to a greater variety of hypotheses. There is 
scarcely a common Christian, and certainly not 
one gospel minister, who has not, at one time 
or another, turned his thoughts to this subject, 
and endeavoured to reduce his views to system- 
atic order. The circumstances which create 
so deep an interest in the priesthood of Mel- 
chisedec need not be specified in this place: 
and we may venture to predict, that, as they 
have operated on the minds of Christians in all 

(7) 



8 PRIESTHOODS OF 

ages down to the present day, there is no dan- 
ger that this type will ever become a matter of 
indifference to the Christian church. Those 
who view the priesthood of our Lord Jesus as 
the foundation of all their hopes and comforts, 
will never neglect the type which defines the 
order of that priesthood; while those, whom 
inclination, or official duty, engages in the 
interpretation of the sacred oracles, cannot 
avoid this subject. Besides, the very difficulty 
of the theme insures it students and authors, 
in consequence of the operation of that in- 
tellectual hardihood, which glories in a dark 
and dubious field. 

The following attempt to illustrate this sub- 
ject is made with a hope, that the Christian 
public will not consider it merely as a curious 
one; a strife of words, incapable of ministering 
to godly edifying ; unworthy a few evenings' 
labour in a minister's study, or one evening's 
attention in a Christian's family. If any such 
prejudice should press on the reader's mind, it 
is hoped that he will pause and reflect : and a 
little reflection will be sufficient to satisfy him, 
that a question respecting his Lord's priesthood; 
one, whose solution is necessary to qualify him 
to perceive the full meaning of a passage in the 
writings of Moses; to understand the 110th 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 9 

psalm, written by David; and to feel the cogency 
of a long argument of the apostle Paul, stated 
in the 5th, and continued throughout the 6th 
and 7th chapters of the epistle to the Hebrews, 
is worthy of serious attention. 

But there is another impression, which the 
title of this dissertation may perhaps make on 
some minds, from which much more serious 
apprehensions are entertained. It may be 
thought, that the subject has been long since 
sufficiently examined ; and that, by men whom 
genius, learning, piety, and superior acquaint- 
ance with all the materials of biblical criticism, 
qualified to do it ample justice. To undertake 
to cast new light upon it, may be regarded as a 
forlorn hope ; perhaps, as a presumptuous at- 
tempt. It may be alleged that the question is 
already decided; that the public have acquiesced 
in the decision ; and that, as there ought to be 
an end to literary discussion, as well as to war, 
the debate should be protracted no farther. If 
all these allegations be correct, the present 
publication is manifestly indiscreet. But is the 
Christian world really satisfied on the present 
subject? Is it a fact, that they acquiesce in 
the interpretations which are current ? The 
ultimate appeal, in this case, must be to the 
Christian ministry ; the proper and adequate 



10 PRIESTHOODS OF 

judges in such matters. But, if a great part of 
them acknowledge that the 7th chapter of the 
epistle to the Hebrews is dark, is mysterious, 
and contains many things hard to be understood;* 
that the drift of the apostle's argument is not 
obvious, that to some of his phrases they can- 
not affix a decisive meaning ; in fine, that they 
wish for a degree of satisfaction which they 
have not yet attained : if this be the case, and 
these be the sentiments and feelings of a majo- 
rity of gospel ministers, then I must insist that 
the question is not decided : and that there is 
yet room, legitimate, fair, honourable room for 
another attempt. And, I persuade myself, that 
he who shall make the attempt will be cheered 
with best wishes for his success, and consoled 
with sympathy in case of failure. 

Melchisedec appears on the sacred page, as 
a subject of history, of typical prophecy, and of 
doctrinal disquisition. In the first of these cha- 

* II. Pet. iii. 16. This text is supposed, by many commenta- 
tors, to have a special reference to the 7th chapter of the epistle 
to the Hebrews : others admonish us of the reverence and sobriety, 
with which we should study that chapter. Such language is more 
than an inuendo that they were not satisfied with their own inter- 
pretations, and were preparing their readers to put up with indis- 
tinct views. Reverence and sobriety command us not to be satis- 
fied till we are sure we understand the mind of the divine Spirit 
speaking in the scriptures. Where the Bible ends, mystery be- 
gins: " but revealed things belong to us." 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 11 

racters he is exhibited, Gen. xiv. 18, 19, 20. — 
In the second, Psalm ex. — In the third, Heb. v. 
6, 10, 11, and iv. 20, and vii. throughout. The 
English reader will turn to these passages in 
the common translation ; but the learned reader 
will have recourse to the originals. It w r ould 
be quite superfluous to exhibit separate inter- 
pretations of these passages. The first is a 
brief historical narrative ; which, of itself, would 
never have drawn particular attention. The 
second is a prophecy, founded on an allusion to 
the former history ; succinct, and certainly not 
very perspicuous. The third is a minute, pre- 
cise, and laboured explanation of the two for- 
mer. To this, therefore, let us direct our 
attention : when we shall have illustrated it, 
the whole will be clear. 

Now, in order to accomplish our purpose, we 
must keep in view this grand fact, that the 
priesthood of Jesus is the theme of the epistle 
to the Hebrews ; and, what is w r orthy of special 
notice, this is the only book in the New Testa- 
ment in which the title of priest is given him. 
The duties of his priesthood — sacrifice, and 
intercession — are mentioned every where ; but 
the official title only here. The subject is dis- 
cussed ex professo : it is the apostle's design to 
exhibit the high priest of our profession in all the 



12 PRIESTHOODS OF 

habiliments, duties, and glories, of his priestly 
character. 

There is one peculiarity which distinguishes 
Paul from the other sacred writers — his habit 
of giving set dissertations on doctrinal subjects. 
It is apparent also, from his writings, that he 
never takes up a doctrinal subject for the mere 
pleasure of theoretic discussion ; but is always 
compelled to do this, by the exigencies of the 
church j particularly, by the assaults made on 
the Christian faith by false teachers. It there- 
fore merits particular inquiry, why he should 
select our Lord's priesthood as the subject of 
formal discussion — and not only inscribe his 
work to the Jews, but address every argument 
in it to their peculiar principles and habits of 
thinking. 

The reason is this ; the priesthood of Jesus 
had been assaulted — they were Jews who made 
the assault — and they were Jews principally 
who suffered by it. It might be thought that, 
as the doctrine of atonement for sin was better 
understood among the Jews than among other 
nations, the atonement of Jesus should have 
found no adversaries from that quarter. The 
reverse, however, was the fact : by no people 
was that doctrine so much opposed. Their 
divine religion, and its divine atonement, occu- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 13 

pied such a place in their hearts, that they saw 
no need of another religion and atonement : 
This divine religion, and its atonement, frequently 
seduced them, after they had embraced Chris- 
tianity, to apostatise : This divine religion, and 
its atonement, furnished a convenient theme of 
declamation to factious men among the Chris- 
tians : besides, the Jewish priesthood, actuated 
perhaps in some instances by honest, though 
ignorant zeal ; but, for the most part, unques- 
tionably actuated by the common motives which 
have converted the established priesthood of 
every nation into persecutors of a rising sect, 
— a tender regard to the dignity of their func- 
tions, and their importance in society, — were 
not idle in sowing discord, and edging the tur- 
bulent spirits, which they might find among the 
Christians, to deeds of mischief. Now, in the 
view of a Jew, and especially a Jewish priest, 
the atonement of Jesus was at once the most 
obnoxious, and the most vulnerable, part of the 
Christian system ; and there, accordingly, they 
made their desperate assault. This general 
view may suffice for the present : an opportu- 
nity will offer for greater precision. 

Now, the apostle's view in this epistle is to 
demonstrate, that the Jewish priesthood and its 
atonement never took away sin, nor brought in 
2 



14 PRIESTHOODS OF 

righteousness, nor saved a soul : that it, and in 
fact the whole law, had but a " shadow of good 
things to come :" that Jesus was the substance 
of that shadow ; the real priest, who made the 
true atonement, and " obtained everlasting re- 
conciliation" for his people. The readers of 
this epistle will have perceived with what care 
the apostle keeps this subject before their eyes 
from the beginning to the end ; calling it up at 
proper intervals, and expressing it in every 
variety of phrase, and showing its connection 
with every duty and comfort of the Christian 
profession. We shall verify these remarks by 
a few quotations. 

Chap. i. 3. " Who, being the brightness of 
his (the Father's) glory, and the express image 
of his person, and upholding all things by the 
word of his power, when he had by himself 
purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of 
the majesty on high." 

Chap. ii. 9. " But we see Jesus, who was 
made a little lower than the angels for the suf- 
fering of death, crowned with glory and honour; 
that he, by the grace of God, should taste death 
for every man." — 10. "For it became him, for 
whom are all things, and by whom are all 
things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to 
make the captain of their salvation perfect 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 15 

through sufferings." 14. "Forasmuch then as 
the children are partakers of flesh and blood, 
he also himself likewise took part of the same ; 
that through death he might destroy him that 
had the power of death, that is, the devil." — 
17. "Wherefore in all things it became him to 
be made like unto his brethren ; that he might 
be a merciful and faithful high priest in things 
pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for 
the sins of the people." 

Chap. iii. 1. "Wherefore, holy brethren, 
partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the 
apostle and high priest of our profession, Christ 
Jesus." 

Chap. iv. 14. " Seeing then we have a great 
high priest that is passed into the heavens, Jesus 
the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession." 
— 15. " For we have not an high priest which 
cannot be touched with the feeling of our infir- 
mities ; but was in all points tempted like as we 
are, yet without sin." — 16. " Let us, therefore, 
come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we 
may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in 
time of need." 

These quotations are sufficient for our pur- 
pose. But what would a Jew say to all this ? 
He would say, it is in vain to talk to me of 
Jesus's atonement, till you have established his 



16 PRIESTHOODS OF 

priestly character ; for that only could give him 
the right and power to make atonement. And 
I insist on having as good evidence of his priest- 
hood, as I have of the priesthood of Aaron. 
Your demand is reasonable, replies Paul : you 
have a right to demand proof that he is a priest, 
and to reject his pretensions if satisfactory 
proof be not furnished. Here we join issue with 
you ; for it is our principle, as well as yours, 
that " no man taketh this honour to himself, but 
he that is called of God as was Aaron."* We 
maintain, as strenuously as you can do, that for 
any person, without a divine commission, to 
step in between an offended God and offending 
sinners, and pretend to atone for the sins of the 
one, and to reconcile both, would be, not only 
the essence of folly, but highly criminal pre- 
sumption. And we assert that Jesus did not 
usurp the honour of the priesthood ;t and stand 
ready to prove that he was called of God, as 
was Aaron, to that high dignity. — Produce your 
proof then, exclaims the Jew. — You have it, 
rejoins Paul, in the 110th psalm; where king 
David uses these words : " The Lord hath sworn, 
and will not repent, thou art a priest for ever 
after the order of Melchisedec." Here is proof 

* Heb. v. 4. t H eb. v. 5. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 17 

positive and indisputable. Messiah, the son of 
David, is a priest — a priest appointed by God 
— appointed with an oath — and after the order 
of Melchisedec. 

It is perfectly apparent that the apostle by 
this quotation proved all he undertook to prove, 
and something more; for he not only established 
the fact that Messiah must be a priest, but fixed 
the order of his priesthood. And alas ! it is 
not the order of Aaron, but the order of Mel- 
chisedec. How is a Jew to endure this ! We 
may condemn antiquity ; nothing is more easy, 
nothing requires less knowledge or virtue ; but 
to judge the ancients is another affair. The 
man who would do this must expunge from his 
mind the knowledge, habits, and sentiments 
of his own age. He must make himself a 
cotemporary with the pannels ; must see with 
their eyes, must adopt their habits, must com- 
municate with them in all their impressions, 
and motives, and feelings. How was a Jew 7 , 
I ask again, to be told that God, wholly over- 
looking the divine priesthood of Levi, had gone 
back to Melchisedec, who was not even of the 
seed of Abraham, and taken his priesthood as 
a more noble pattern for the priesthood of 
Messiah ? Say not, the evidence was such as 
to compel belief. In real life, motives have as 
2* 



18 PRIESTHOODS OF 

much, if not more, to do with our principles, 
than evidence. And, in the present case, 
though the evidence was strong on the one 
side; the motives were on the other. Paul 
saw the peril of his situation, as the advocate 
of divine truth. He saw arrayed against him 
an host of prejudices inherent in the blood of 
Israelites, and consecrated into religious prin- 
ciples, by zeal for their ecclesiastical establish- 
ment. He knew r that where national pride is 
concerned, where the confidence of old opinions 
is to be encountered, where the strongest of 
human principles — religious vanity — is to be 
humbled, the triumph of truth is scarcely possi- 
ble; because, in such circumstances, men, so 
far from candidly weighing evidence, have 
already pre-judged the question. 

Aman honest though weak, may tell the truth, 
but in general, like the prophecies of Cassandra, 
it will do no good. It belongs to wisdom to 
give practical effect to truth. Paul was wise. 
His great apprehension was that his country- 
men would spurn the question, and refuse to 
admit to discussion the idea of a priesthood 
different from Aaron's.* His object is to com- 

* Note. General addresses to large bodies of men are always 
to be understood with those limitations which the knowledge of 
real life suggests. It would be too much to suspect the whole 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 19 

pel them to investigate that question. And, to 
accomplish his purpose, in a strain of terror, 
sufficient to make the hair stand on our heads, 
and that has shook with dread the consciences 
of Christians from that day to this, he demon- 
strates that an error on this subject is perdition. 
They must, therefore, they must, at the peril 
of their souls, examine whether Jesus has not 
a priesthood, totally different in nature and 
efficacy, from the priesthood of Aaron. This 
is his sole object from the 11th verse of the 5th 
chapter to the end of the 6th. A more con- 
summate piece of oratorial address, was not 
penned since man first dipt pen in ink. It 
shows us the man who knows human nature : 



body of Jewish Christians of doubting the priesthood of Messiah: 
of those who doubted, some must have carried their objections far- 
ther than others ; and a great variety of causes must have ope- 
rated on the minds of the different parties. There were turbulent 
schismatics — there were hypocritical professors — very ignorant 
and very weak believers, affected by doubts of different kinds, 
among the Jewish Christians : and, therefore, although the apos- 
tle's arguments establish the truth equally to all ; it would be 
unjust to give an equally extensive application to his inuendoes. 
Besides, we cannot suppose the apostle indifferent to the fate of 
the unconverted Jews : and as all these, particularly the priests, 
would be clamorous against the idea of a priesthood different from 
that of Aaron, it is morally certain that the apostle would have 
some regard to their conversion, in his treatment of his subject : 
or, supposing him to have little hopes of their conversion, he must 
have been solicitous to stop their mouths. 



20 PRIESTHOODS OF 

and is fully worthy of Paul, or rather, I should 
say, of the Spirit by whom he was instructed. 
Let us attend to the workings of the apostle's 
mind : it is necessary to our purpose to do so. 
He commences, by telling them that he had 
many things to say of priest Melchisedec, as a 
type of priest Messiah ; but adds, with magnani- 
mous and prepossessing candour, that they were 
such poor proficients in Christian knowledge, 
so " unskilful in the word of righteousness," 
that nothing but the " first principles of the ora- 
cles of God," such as 'faith, repentance, and fu- 
ture judgment, (those initiatory principles, the 
knowledge of which was exacted of converts 
previous to baptism,) and that imposition of 
hands, which conferred the Holy Ghost, could 
be offered to them with any great prospect of 
advantage. He tells them they are " babes," 
who " have need of milk," or the simplest ele- 
mentary truths ; not full grown men, who are 
capable of digesting the " strong meat," which 
God has provided, in the enlarged and general 
views of gospel doctrine. However, in the face 
of all these discouragments, he avows his deter- 
mination to use his utmost effort to carry them 
on to perfection — to that state of Christian ma- 
turity, in which they w r ould be capable of enjoy- 
ing the full consolation of their holy faith. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 21 

He then places before them the tremendous 
danger to which they would expose their souls, 
if they should neglect to second him, by giving 
this subject a serious examination, and adopt- 
ing a correct decision. He reminds them of 
the example of some, who, like them, had passed 
the threshold of the Christian church ; but neg- 
lecting to advance, and beginning to doubt, had 
fallen into a course of backsliding, which had 
terminated in the most deplorable apostacy. 
Of such apostates he draws a most horrific pic- 
ture. The privileges which those unhappy 
persons had enjoyed, and the attainments to 
which they had arrived, are enumerated in slow 
detail. They had been " enlightened" in the 
doctrine of salvation by Jesus : they had " tasted 
of the heavenly gift" and been " made partakers 
of the Holy Ghost" having received him after 
the day of Pentecost, not as a spirit of sanctifi- 
cation, which was enjoyed under the law ; but 
as a spirit of gospel illumination, which was 
received, not by " the law," but by " the hearing 
of faith." # They had " tasted the good word of 
God" having been convinced of the truth of the 
gospel, and induced to adopt its profession ; and 
" the powers of the world to come" or the mira- 
culous powers of Messiah's earthly kingdom. 

* Gal. iii. 2. 



22 PRIESTHOODS OF 

Such were the attainments of these apostates. 
But after having been lifted up to heaven, in 
respect to privilege, they plunged to hell with 
proportionate guilt. They crucified to themselves 
the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open 
shame; daringly spurning the doctrine of salva- 
tion by his blood : and thus sealed their doom. 
Better they had never known the truth : for 
then their sin& would have had the extenuation 
of ignorance ; or, it might have been possible 
to convert them by the preaching of the gospel. 
But now, after having audaciously denied the 
truth, of which they had been convinced — after 
having surrendered their understanding to so- 
phistry, steeled their consciences against re- 
morse, and thus insulted the Holy Ghost ; God 
gives them up to strong delusions that they may 
believe a lie, declares that his Spirit shall no 
longer strive with them, commands his church 
not to breathe a prayer for them, and abandons 
them to their sin and its reward.* 



* This passage of scripture, viz. Heb. vi. 4, 5, 6, — and that 
other passage, chap. x. 29, have nothing to do with the question, 
whether a regenerated person may fall from a state of grace. 
The question to which these passages relate, is this : whether a 
person, who has heard the gospel, and has been enlightened by 
the Spirit of God to perceive its truth, and adopt it with joy, may, 
after all, renounce the whole system of divine truth, and spurn 
the idea of salvation by the blood of Jesus. The scriptures cer- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC, 23 

I am persuaded that this is no fancy piece : 
but that the apostle is here describing what his 

tainly speak of this as a possible case ; and too many instances of 
the fact have occurred, to admit any doubt about the existence of 
such apostates. It is an apostacy, known to, and gloried in, by 
the apostates themselves: an apostacy, which the Christian church 
can see and know, else the general commandment to pray for all 
men, had never been limited by a command not to pray for such 
men : finally, it is an apostacy from which there is no recovery. 

We sometimes hear Christians, in their prayers, confessing that 
they " have crucified the Son of God afresh, and put him to an 
open shame." — " That they have trodden under foot the Son of 
God, and counted the blood of the covenant with which he was 
sanctified an unholy thing." We may not charge such persons 
with any error in idea; but their expressions are in the highest 
degree improper: for, they confess a sin, which no Christian, at 
any period of his life, ever committed : nay, one which no pro- 
fessor of Christianity has committed : they confess themselves 
guilty of the unpardonable sin. Those dreadful terms are appro- 
priated by the divine Spirit to the most dreadful instance of human 
guilt: the association between the phraseology and the crime 
should never be dissolved. The highest effect of the malignity 
of sin, and the most unrelenting wrath displayed by God in his 
government over man, should stand distinct from ordinary crimes 
and punishments. Two important ends would be promoted by 
this. The man enlightened in the doctrine of salvation through 
the blood of Jesus, would be put on his guard against the sophis- 
tries and corruptions which would lead him from one step of 
backsliding to another, till he had "trampled under foot the Son 
of God." On the other hand, tender consciences would be de- 
livered from needless terrors. A mind only partially instructed 
in the doctrine of the gospel, and disordered by the intense opera- 
tions of a conscience deeply convicted of sin, and by the fiery darts 
of the evil one, is apt to aggravate all things, and impute to 
itself, not only its real guiltiness, but a guilt from which it i3 free, 
that of the sin unto death. Let the nature of that sin be distinctly 



24 PRIESTHOODS OF 

eyes had often seen. It has all the congruity 
of a painting from the life. It will have been 
noted that Paul places the essence of apostacy 
in rejecting the atonement of Jesus ; or, to use 
his own words, in " crucifying the Son of God 
afresh, and putting him to an open shame j" or, 
as the idea is yet more fully expressed in the 
10th chapter, in treading under foot the Son of 
God , and counting the blood of the covenant where- 
with he was sanctified, an unholy thing. How 
well suited this representation of his was to pro- 
duce the impression on the mind of the Jews 
most favourable to his design is apparent to 
every one. The priesthood of Jesus, as distin- 
guished from that of Aaron, is his theme ; and 
he tells them that they must cleave to that 
priesthood and its atonement, — or they are lost : 
from that priesthood, now that they had been 
enlightened in its nature, should they apostatise, 
though no farther than to the Aaronic priest- 
hood, repentance is impossible ; and mercy no 
more. 

But does he suspect the whole Christian 
church of verging towards apostacy ? Is he so 

known. Surely every Christian can lay his hand on his breast, 
and looking up to the Searcher of hearts, can say, I do not " count 
the blood of Jesus an unholy thing :" " I do not tread the Son of 
God contemptuously under foot." I do know that his blood is 
precious blood. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 25 

injudicious as to express distrust, while he la- 
bours to create confidence ? God forbid that 
the body of the faithful should ever become the 
object of distrust and jealousy ! The apostle 
did not suspect the Christian Jews of being 
generally inclined to reject the priesthood of 
their Messiah. He is equally above pretending 
an unfounded alarm, or cherishing an unfounded 
confidence. The conduct of the general body 
was such as to prove the sincerity of their faith ; 
and as few men ever felt a keener indignation 
against iniquity, or could express themselves 
with greater severity against wicked men, than 
Paul ; so there never was, perhaps, any man, 
who felt a more sincere pleasure in recognising 
virtue, and praising virtuous men. He there- 
fore thus addresses them, in the strain of con- 
fidence and commendation : " but beloved we 
hope better things of you, and things which 
accompany salvation, though we thus speak/ 9 
A few had apostatised, but the general body 
had retained the faith: some might be just 
objects of suspicion, but the mass of them w r ere 
objects of confidence ; they might be weak, 
might have their doubts and difficulties, but they 
had given abundant proofs of sincerity and can- 
dour. Ch. vi. 9, 10. 

The apostle proceeds however to caution 
3 



26 PRIESTHOODS OF 

them against danger : there was danger, and 
he exhorts them to use the means of avoiding 
it. " And we desire that every one of you do 
shew the same diligence, to the full assurance 
of hope unto the .end ; that ye be not slothful, 
but followers of them who through faith and 
patience inherit the promises.' 9 Ch. vi. 11, 12. 

He concludes by holding out the most decided 
hopes of success, to animate their exertions. 
He reminds them of the promise of God to their 
father Abraham, afterwards confirmed by an 
oath : which promise, and oath, says he, are 
two immutable securities, that we might have 
strong consolation who have fled for refuge to 
lay hold on the hope set before us : which hope 
we have, as an anchor of the soul, both sure 
and steadfast, and which entereth into that 
within the vail, whither the forerunner is for us 
entered. Ch. vi. 13. — 20. 

Having thus raised an high idea of the im- 
portance of his theme : — having humbled their 
pride, by reflecting on the deficiency of their 
knowledge : — having alarmed their fears, by 
the danger of apostacy :— conciliated their be- 
nevolence, by avowing his conviction of the sin- 
cerity of their Christian faith : — and animated 
them with hopes derived from the covenant 
faithfulness of their God — he resumes the subject 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 27 

of discussion, " Jesus made an high priest after 
the order of Melchisedec." Ch. vi. 20. 

After so long an introduction, the reader per- 
haps is impatient to enter on the subject. But 
we must beg his indulgence a little longer, till 
we shall have examined the correctness of two 
notions, which have exerted an unhappy in- 
fluence on the minds of most people who have 
studied the scriptures relating to Melchisedec. 

I. Is it a fact — Or have we any reason to 
believe — that the Apostle has kept back from 
his readers any thing that he knew of this sub- 
ject ? He tells us he had many things to say 
of Melchisedec ; but he seems to hesitate about 
saying them. Perhaps he has left some of 
them unuttered and thus put it out of our power 
to attain that satisfaction, which nothing but a 
connected view of a whole theme can afford. 
If this be the case, we must commence our 
labours with depressed spirits ; for nothing so 
damps the ardour of inquiry as a previous im- 
pression that satisfaction is unattainable. 

Now it is believed there is no reason what- 
ever, not even the shadow of a reason, or of a 
suspicion, that the apostle has left untold a 
single one of the many things he had to say 
about Melchisedec. For, iu the first place, it 
is not possible that he should raise such lofty 



28 PRIESTHOODS OF 

expectations, and labour through so long a 
proemium, to dispose us to listen and learn ; 
and then to frustrate, and mock our hopes, by 
telling but half the tale. Let not Paul be sus- 
pected of a piece of deception, which would 
render any writer contemptible. And then, in 
the second place, on examining his discourse, 
we find it so minute, and circumstantial, that it 
is impossible to conceive an omission. Melchi- 
sedec's name, royalty, city, priesthood, bles- 
sing of Abraham, and receiving tythes from 
him ; his separation from, and superiority over, 
the Levitical, priests, are all condescended on ; 
and his typical relation, in all these respects, to 
Messiah argued even to minutiae. We are not 
justifiable in presuming that any writer, much 
less an inspired writer, has treated his subject 
imperfectly, unless we can point with our finger 
to the precise omission. This, in the present 
case, no man has done, and no man can do. 
Paul has finished his portrait of Melchisedec, 
with professed precision. 

II. The other idea, and the one that has had 
the chief share in preventing Christians from 
understanding this subject, is this : that there is 
some undefined, and it would seem undefinable, 
difficulty ; some profound mystery, in the apos- 
tle's discourse concerning Melchisedec. For 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC 29 

has he not told us himself that the things he 
had to say were "hard to be uttered:" a deep 
mystery then, no doubt, they contain ; perhaps, 
an inscrutable mystery: for, a difficulty so great 
in the times of inspiration, may well be sup- 
posed insuperable in this remote age, so much 
less skilled in typical questions. This is all 
very plausible. And there is no manner of 
doubt, that the imagined abstruseness of the 
theme has discouraged many from studying it ; 
and seduced into refinements and sublimities, 
those who could not be deterred from investi- 
gation. 

But this prejudice, though formidable, is quite 
unfounded. We have no reason to suppose 
this a difficult, or mysterious question: but 
ample reason to believe it the reverse. The 
apostle's own discourse must furnish the evi- 
dence of this assertion. Does Paul insinuate 
that he found any abstruseness in the subject ? 
Does he here, as in another instance, talk of 
"unspeakable words — which it was not possible 
for a man to utter ?"* No such thing. Let 
any candid man read the last five verses of the 
fifth, and the first two verses of the sixth chap- 
ter, and he will find that the whole difficulty 
lay with the readers, not with the writer. 

* 2 Cor. xii. 4. 

3* 



30 PRIESTHOODS OF 

And I beg that it may be accurately noted, 
and remembered, that, in reflecting on the 
incapacity of his readers, he does not once hint 
at the weakness of the human intellect, nor at 
any infirmity common to Christians : it is a 
specific infirmity, peculiar, and reproachful, to 
the Christianised Jews of that day. — "Many 
things," says he, " hard to be uttered seeing ye 
are dull of hearing ; for when for the time ye 
ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach 
you again ivhich be the first principles of the 
oracles of God ; and are become such as have 
need of milk, and not of strong meat. For 
every one who useth milk, is unskilful in the 
word of righteousness ; for he is a babe. But 
strong meat belongeth to them that are of full 
age, who by reason of use have their senses 
exercised to, discern both good and evil. There- 
fore, leaving the first principles of the doctrine 
of Christ, let us go on unto perfection" &c. 
This is plain language. They were Jewish 
babes, persons unskilful in the word of righteous- 
ness, persons who needed to be taught again 
the first principles of the oracles of God; babes, 
capable of feeding only on milk. — These were 
the persons to whom the apostle's words were 
hard to be uttered. This is the utmost limit 
to which Paul carried the insinuation of any 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 31 

difficulty in his subject. To talk of difficulty 
beyond this, is to talk without book. And 
surely it may be admitted, nay, it absolutely 
must be admitted, that persons not labouring 
under the inveterate prejudices of the Jews, 
and the infantine weakness of Jewish Chris- 
tians; that men of full age, who by reason of 
use have their senses exercised to discern both 
good and evil, may find the subject very simple, 
and very plain. This I believe to be the fact. 
And am persuaded that the chief erfrfearrass- 
ment in interpreting the scriptures respecting 
Melchisedec has originated in one of the com- 
monest, but least curable, of human propensities, 
an inclination to search for mysteries in plain 
matters. 

The following interpretation is certainly sim- 
ple ; very remote, indeed, from all that is pro- 
found and mysterious. But, should it be re- 
jected, I must, even then, insist that the true 
interpretation, wheresover, and by whomsoever 
found, shall be one, which, though it may non- 
plus babes, will not perplex those, who by rea- 
son of use, have their senses exercised to dis- 
cern both good and evil. 



PART II. 

As the apostle has introduced into his dis- 
course the priesthoods of Melchisedec, Aaron, 
and Jesus — we shall inquire into the divine ori- 
gin of these three priesthoods. 

As he has asserted that Melchisedec's priest- 
hood is, and that Aaron's priesthood is not, the 
examplar of Christ's — we shall inquire, in what 
sense Jesus is said to be a priest after the order 
of Melchisedec, and not after the order of Aaron. 

As he has produced the prophecy of David, 
that Messiah should be a priest after the order 
of Melchisedec — we shall inquire, what could be 
David's motive ; or rather, what could be the 
intention of the Divine Spirit, in assigning that 
order of priesthood to him, rather than the order 
of Aaron. 

And, in fine, as the apostle's discussion of 
the order of Messiah's priesthood is long, mi- 
nute, and precise — we shall inquire, why he 
found it necessary to argue this subject so per- 
tinaciously with the Jews. 

L Of the divine origin of the priesthoods of 
Melchisedec, Aaron, and Jesus. 

According to the evidence of scriptural his- 
tory, the only admissible evidence in the case, 

(32) 






JESUS CHRIST Ax\D MELCHISEDEC. 33 

these three priesthoods were divinely consti- 
tuted j and the only divinely constituted priest- 
hoods that ever existed among men. Of these, 
calculating from the commencement of sacrifi- 
cial functions, Melchisedec's was the first. It 
is obvious, that by priest is here meant an offi- 
cial character, a man " taken from among men," 
and "ordained for men, in things pertaining to 
God, that he might offer both gifts and sacrifi- 
ces for sin." # Of such, Melchisedec w r as the 
first. Previous to his day, the offering of gifts 
and sacrifices for sins was, like prayer, the com- 
mon right of the faithful ; as appears from the 
offerings of Cain and Abel,t of Noah,:}; &c. &c. 
In this situation matters continued in respect to 
worshippers generally, (the tribe which Melchi- 
sedec represented probably excepted,) and to 
the posterity of Abraham in particular ; even 
after the constitution of God's covenant with 
him, and down to the consecration of Aaron. 
Previous to this latter period, there was not a 
priest in Abraham's family ; but, as numerous 
instances attest, every worshipper offered up his 
own sacrifice, or invited and employed what 
assistants he pleased. For ages after the call- 
ing of Abraham, the institutions of true religion, 
and the dispensation of the Spirit of grace, 

* Heb. v. 1. t Gen. iv. 3, 4. { Gen. viii. 20. 



34 PRIESTHOODS OF 

were continued to several other tribes of men : 
among these also, the right to offer sacrifice, 
belonged, for any thing we know, to the faithful 
in common. 

In the early ages of the world, religion had 
not received that organization, which has dis- 
tinguished religious societies in subsequent pe- 
riods. Prophets every age had : Adam, no 
doubt, was the first j Enoch, Noah, and others 
succeeded; for there could not be any such 
thing as religion, without a divine revelation : 
and by a procedure, the wisdom and goodness 
of which are equally apparent, God raised up 
from among men the instruments by which his 
will should be made known to their respective 
generations. But these were extraordinary 
characters, and are not known to have had any 
peculiar functions in the ordinary offices of 
religious worship. The faithful had no fixed 
teachers, to preach the truths, or doctrines of 
religion j no fixed priests, to present their sacri- 
fices and offerings. Every pious man, no doubt, 
was ready to embrace such opportunities as 
might offer of instructing others, and presented 
his sacrifice in person. We are not to imagine, 
however, that religion was, in the times alluded 
to, so entirely a private and personal concern, 
as to be wholly destitute of social character. It 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 35 

did always possess social character, and ad- 
mitted the communion of saints : but that cha- 
racter was defined, not by ecclesiastical con- 
stitution, but by the natural arrangements of 
human society. Thus we find Job offering up 
sacrifices for his children,* and Jethro, in com- 
munion with Moses, Aaron, and the elders of 
Israel, offering up sacrifice in the Israelitish 
camp.t Such a course things would naturally 
take. For, as families and states are equally 
bound with individuals, to acknowledge the 
Supreme Being; so it is plain, that those reli- 
gious solemnities, by which such acknowledg- 
ment is made, must of right and necessity, (no 
divine constitution withstanding,) be conducted 
by the chief ruler ; by the head of the family in 
the one case, and by the magistrate in the other. 
Let us indulge a passing glance down the 
vista, which opens to us a prospect of the do- 
main of heathenism. There too, we find the 
priesthood an appendage to the magistracy. 
Omitting other instances, it shall suffice to 
notice that the priesthood was a prerogative 
of royalty in the original constitution of Rome. 
This connection of offices commenced with 
Romulus, expired with Tarquin, and was re- 
vived, after a long interval, in the person of 

* Job i. f Exod. xviii. 12. 



36 PRIESTHOODS OF 

Julius Caesar. There is a fact too remarkable 
to be omitted, even in this short notice of the 
subject; that so fixed and inveterate had the 
idea of a king-priest become among the Ro- 
mans, that they considered such a character 
essential to the state j and, accordingly, when 
they abolished royalty and instituted a republi- 
can form of government, they judged it neces- 
sary to elect a Rex Sacrorum, or king of the 
sacred rites, to attend to those sacerdotal func- 
tions, which had belonged to the kings, under 
the ancient regiment There is, however, no 
good reason for the allegation, that kings ori- 
ginally usurped the priesthood. For from whom 
should they usurp it ? The same constitution 
which made them the representatives of their 
states, gave them a necessary precedence in 
the expressions of national devotion. But time 
would show the importance of a prerogative, 
which exhibited them to the eyes of their sub- 
jects in the august character of ministers of the 
gods ; and which, by giving them the control of 
the popular conscience, or, what in most cases 
is the same thing, of the popular superstition, 
rendered that mighty engine subservient to their 

* Rerum deinde divinarum habita cura, et quia qusedam publica 
sacra per ipsos reges factitata erant, ne ubiubi regum desiderium 
esset, regem sacrificulum creant. — Liv. lib. ii. cap. 2. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 37 

political designs. Under the Horeb covenant, 
the priesthood was separated from the civil au- 
thority. There first we discover the rudiments 
of an enlarged policy. The priesthood, free 
and independent — are limited to the concerns 
of piety and morality j that the public con- 
science might not be perverted by the contin- 
gencies of peace and war, and other political 
events, which operate so largely on the moral 
sentiments and habits of mankind. On the other 
hand, the civil magistrate is left to pursue the 
national policy, under the censorship of the 
national conscience. How the balance was held 
between the civil and ecclesiastical powers, 
under the theocracy, this is not the place to 
enquire. But it is within the knowledge of 
every one, that to re-unite those functions, se- 
parated by God himself, has been the effort of 
all ages since. Hence, we see the magistrate 
swallowing up the priesthood : there, the priest- 
hood engulphs the civil power : while either 
event is highly injurious to society ; but the lat- 
ter most. 

But to return to our subject. As no priest- 
hood existed previous to the days of Abraham, 
nor in his family, till the consecration of Aaron; 
as no evidence of divine origin can be produced 
in behalf of the heathenish priesthoods ; and, as 
4 



38 PRIESTHOODS OF 

we are assured that Melchisedec was a divinely 
constituted priest ; it follows, that he w r as the 
first priest among men, and his the first priest- 
hood. Let us, therefore, produce the evidence 
that this man had a divine appointment to the 
priest's office. 

1. He is denominated \vhv W? iro, Priest of 
the Most High God. 

The term pD, Cohen, has been considered by- 
some, who are never to be named without re- 
spect, as a sacred title, and never applied to any 
who are not, in the official sense, priests. But 
the scriptural usage of the term establishes the 
contrary opinion. From that usage we collect 
that |rti, Cohen, is a title of honour, a subordinate 
title, and a title given equally to officers in 
church, and in state. Take the following proofs. 

A list of the civil and ecclesiastical officers, 
in the days of David, is given, 2 Sam. viii., in 
which we notice this double application of this 
official title. Thus, Zadok and Ahimelech were 
D^nn, Cohanim ; viz., of God, that is Priests, 
verse 17 : and David's sons were Duna Coha- 
nim ; viz., of their father, that is, his ministers 
of state: verse 18. 

A similar list is given, 2 Sam. xx. At that 
time Zadok and Abiathar were wm, Cohanim, 
Priests of God : and Ira, the Jairite, was fro, 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 39 

Cohen, to David ; or, his minister of state : 
verse 26, 

In 1 Kings iii., we have an account of the 
civil and ecclesiastical officers, in the reign of 
Solomon. At that time Zadok and Abiathar 
were d^hj, Cohanim, or priests of God : and Za- 
bud, the son of Nathan, was f??on nan |dd, Cohen, 
Sfc, the king's confidential minister of state. 

Further, it may be remarked that the verb 
jro, which associates with the above mentioned 
official title, is never used in the scriptures to 
express civil ministration. This is somewhat 
strange : as the title denotes equally a civil, or 
a religious minister; one would expect that the 
verb would equally signify civil, or religious 
ministration. This, it seems, is not the case. 
Yet, a person acquainted with the philosophy 
of language, will strongly suspect that the verb 
must have had an application of that sort, as 
well as the noun, though instances do not occur 
in the Bible. There, it uniformly signifies 
priestly ministration, except in Isaiah Ixi. 10., 
where it has a highly figurative signification : 
the allusion, however, is to the priesthood. 

Now, as the verb is never used to express 
ordinary, or servile labour : as the term pp, Co- 
hen, is never used like lap, Gnebed, as a term of 
voluntary humiliation : and, in fine, as it is the 



40 PRIESTHOODS OF 

title of the immediate ministers of God, and of 
sovereign princes ; it is a titfe of honour. As it 
is never used in speaking of sovereign princes, 
but only of their ministers, or the ministers of 
God, it is a subordinate title. And the passages 
which have been quoted show that it belongs 
equally to officers in church, and in state. 

Having fixed the meaning of this official title, 
this appears to be the proper place -to consider 
a few passages of scripture, which, from the 
application of it, seem to create some embar- 
rassment to our general doctrine of three divine- 
ly constituted priesthoods. 

The priests of Egypt, mra, Cohanim ; Gen. 
xlvii. 22 ; and Potiphar, jro, Cohen, priest of On; 
Gen. xli. 45, 50 — who were they ? Priests of 
God, or ministers of Pharaoh ? If they were 
priests of God, the idea of three divine priest- 
hoods must be given up. And even should we 
deny the divine origin of their priesthood, yet, 
if we admit them to be priests at all, we will find 
ourselves involved in some difficulty : for, as it 
is notorious, that the religious rites and officers 
of heathenism, were, in most instances copied 
from some antecedent divine institution ; and, 
as the solitary instance of Melchisedec's priest- 
hood does not appear of sufficient celebrity to 
affect the organization of society in the sur- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 41 

rounding empires ; will not the existence of an 
order of priests in Egypt, furnish presumptive evi- 
dence of an antecedent divine order of priests ? 

To this it is answered — that we have no evi- 
dence that Potiphar, and the other pare, Coha- 
nim, in Egypt, were priests of God. We have 
evidence that they were ministers of Pharaoh. 
All history testifies that this class of men, in 
Egypt, were not mere ministers of religion: 
religion, in fact, was the least important of their 
functions. They were the philosophers, astro- 
nomers, surveyors, engineers, architects, histo- 
rians, and instructors of the nation : in a word, 
all offices, dependent on learning, fell into their 
hands, as being the only persons qualified for 
them. The population of Egypt was divided 
into five classes, the priests, the soldiers, the 
shepherds, the husbandmen, and the artificers j 
of which, the former were continually about the 
person of the king, and employed in every busi- 
ness requiring superior knowledge : and, even 
religion itself, was quite a philosophical busi- 
ness among the Egyptians, Chaldeans, and other 
nations of the east. We are, therefore, with- 
out any good reason for believing that the 
priests of Egypt were either priests of God, or 
formed on any pre-existing divine model. 

Jethro, priest of Midian, Moses's father-in- 
4* 



42 PRIESTHOODS OF 

law, who was he, a prince, or a priest of God? 
Not the latter : he is never so called : and as to 
his offering sacrifice, Exod. xviii. 12; the fact 
is irrelative to the question ; as Abraham, Jacob, 
Moses, &c, offered sacrifices without being 
priests. On the other hand, the term pj, Cohen, 
never being used as the title of a sovereign 
prince, but of the minister of a sovereign prince; 
such we believe to have been the station of 
Jethro. 

The d\td, Cohanim, mentioned in Exod. xix. 
22. " And let the priests also, which come near 
unto the Lord, sanctify themselves ; lest the 
Lord break forth upon them." What priests 
were these ? A reference to chapter xxiv. 4, 5, 
6, will furnish an answer to this enquiry. " And 
Moses wrote all the words of the Lord, and 
rose up early in the morning, and builded an 
altar under the hill, and twelve pillars accord- 
ing to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent 
young men, D^ro, Cohanim, of the children of 
Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacri- 
ficed peace offerings, of oxen unto the Lord. 
And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in 
basons ; and half of the blood he sprinkled on 
the altar." These young men were the p'anp, 
Cohanim, or ministers of Moses, whom he em- 
ployed in the servile part of sacrificing, reserv- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 4d 

ing the noble part, the sprinkling of the sacrifi- 
cial blood, to himself. 

What is the meaning of that promise, Exod. 
xix. 6. " And ye shall be unto me," [o^ra rcfeno 
wip >tfi — " a kingdom of priests, and a holy na- 
tion ?" Would it not seem as if the idea of 
priestly consecration was familiar to the people 
of Israel, previous to the Horeb covenant and 
institution of the Levitical priesthood ? — I an- 
swer, no. The candid reader must admit, that 
to adopt the hypothesis of an antecedent priest- 
hood well known to the Israelites, while he finds 
no such order of men among the tribes of Abra- 
ham, (and the solitary instance of Melchisedec 
was, in all probability, quite overlooked,) would 
be rash and unwarrantable. Without adopting 
so bold an hypothesis, the passage admits an 
easy interpretation, full of spirit and meaning, 
and perfectly consistent with the ascertained 
facts of ancient history. They had just left 
Egypt, where they had seen the priests occupy 
the most honourable station about the king, 
discharge the most important duties, and receive 
an ample reward for their services : and the 
passage of scripture under consideration may 
be viewed as alluding to that state of things, 
and as containing a promise that God, on being 
chosen king of the Israelitish nation, would 



44 PRIESTHOODS OF 

make them all as honourable and happy as the 
priests of Egypt. 

To conclude this article of proof, it appears 
that Melchisedec was a priest of the Most High 
God, and the first man that ever bore that cha- 
racter ; or, indeed, enjoyed it at all till the con- 
secration of Aaron and his sons. 

II. Our second proof of his divine appoint- 
ment is taken from the 110th psalm; where 
Messiah is represented as constituted a priest 
after the order of Melchisedec ; which takes the 
priesthood of the latter as a settled point. The 
Jews, in order to get rid of the obnoxious doc- 
trine of Messiah's priesthood, a doctrine which 
involves them in great embarrassment respect- 
ing the prerogatives of the tribes of Judah and 
Levi, insist on giving the term po, Cohen, in this 
psalm, its civil sense. But the miserable gloss 
dethrones their Messiah. For if he be not the 
priest of God, but only the minister of an earthly 
prince, he ceases to be a sovereign, a king, on 
the throne of his father David. But take the 
passage in its obvious sense, and all is luminous 
and consistent. Messiah, a king on the throne 
of David, is Jehovah's pD, Cohen, or priest, after 
the similitude of Melchisedec, who was both a 
king and a priest. 

III. Our third proof is found, Heb. v. i. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 45 

where Paul says that every high priest, Xa^jSav- 
o^evos sg avdjwirwv, « being taken from among men 
is ordained for men, in things pertaining to 
God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices 
for sin." And again he says, verse 4 : " And 
no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he 
that is called of God as was Aaron." Now as 
no man could be a priest without a divine 
appointment ; and, as Moses, David, and Paul, 
testify that Melchisedec was a priest, it follows 
that he must have had a divine appointment to 
that office. 

After delaying so long on the priesthood of 
Melchisedec, we will readily be excused from 
quoting the passages of scripture which prove 
that the priesthoods of Aaron and Jesus had a 
similar origin, especially as the proof, in both 
instances, is ample, obvious, and aquiesced in. 

Previous however to dismissing the Aaronic 
priesthood, it may not be deemed superfluous 
to advert to a class of facts in the Jewish his- 
tory, which seem to interfere with its constitu- 
tional privileges. The constitution runs thus : 
Numb, xviii. 7. " Thou and thy sons with 
thee" (the speech is addressed to Aaron) "shall 
keep your priest's office for every thing of the 
altar and within the vail ; and ye shall serve : 
I have given your priest's office unto you as a 



46 PRIESTHOODS OF 

service of gift : and the stranger" (that is a 
person not of the family of Aaron) " that 
cometh nigh" (to offer sacrifices, or do the 
priest's office) " shall be put to death." Upon 
this ground it was that the priests resisted king 
Uzziah, when he invaded their office ; and God 
seconded them in defending their rights, by 
striking the king with leprosy, in the very act 
of usurpation. 2 Chron. xxvi. 16 — 21. Yet 
all this notwithstanding, we find frequent in- 
stances of persons who were not priests, offer- 
ing up sacrifice, without opposition from men, 
and with the approbation of God: such as 
Samuel ; 1 Sam. xvi. 2, &c. Gideon ; Judges, 
vi. 24, &c. Elijah ; 1 Kings xviii. 31, &c. But 
such instances did not at all interfere with the 
ordinary priesthood, God limited the children 
of Israel to the ministration of the sons of 
Aaron in the services of the altar : but he did 
not limit himself from commanding and accept- 
ing sacrifices from other hands. Inspiration 
furnished full powers. The sovereign of all has 
a right to demand the services of whom he 
pleases. But these extraordinary sacrificers 
are never called, nor considered, priests ; any 
more than Abraham or Job. 

Perhaps it may be thought that more time 
has been spent in establishing the position that 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 47 

there never was more than three priesthoods, than 
either the importance of the fact in any view, 
or its connection with the object of this disser- 
tation, will justify. A different opinion however 
was entertained. It was, indeed, perceived 
that were there a thousand priesthoods, still 
Melchisedec'S is, and Aaron's is not, the pattern 
of Messiahs. But we endeavoured to establish 
the fact of there being only three priesthoods, 
not for the light which it casts on some passages 
of scripture, but because, though not essential, 
it is not quite irrelevant to our purpose. To 
perceive that this is the case, let the following 
remarks be considered. It will not be denied 
that if the reality, and nature, of Christ's priest- 
hood be perceived and admitted, all ideas of 
typical patterns are superseded and useless. 
For the sole use of such patterns and analogies 
is to prove the fact of his priesthood, and ex- 
plain the nature of his functions. When, in 
the days of king David, Messiah was to be 
exhibited to the Jewish nation as their Priest ; 
the divine spirit had two priesthoods, either of 
which might have been brought forward as a 
pattern, viz. Melchisedec's and Aaron's. He 
chose the former, in preference to the latter, 
because it did as well establish the fact, that 
Messiah should be a priest, as the other could 



48 PRIESTHOODS OF 

do — And, at the same time warned against an 
error, to which that nation would one day be 
exposed. This idea will be fully evolved in a 
subsequent part of this discourse. I will only 
add, that there is little reason to doubt that in 
addition to the importance of Melchisedec's 
priesthood to his cotemporaries, a great and an 
essential end of its original institution was to 
have in reserve a pattern, by which, when Mes- 
siah should appear, his priesthood might be 
proven — while at the same time it was distin- 
guished from the Levitical priesthood, with 
which it was foreseen that it would be con- 
founded. 

II. The second subject of enquiry is, in what 
sense Jesus is said to be a priest after the order 
of Melchisedec, and not after the order of 
Aaron. 

The first idea that strikes one, on hearing 
that one priest is after the order of another, is 
this — that they both have precisely the same 
rights and functions ; and these functions the 
same efficacy. Thus, the high priests who suc- 
ceeded Aaron, were of the same order with him : 
the office, its duties, and its efficacy, remained 
immutable ; and descended pure and entire, like 
an estate equally incapable of waste and of 
augmentation. In this sense, Jesus was neither 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 49 

of the order of Melchisedec, nor of Aaron. His 
priesthood was peculiar : his sacrifice was his 
soul : " neither by the blood of goats and calves, 
but by his own blood, he entered in once into 
the holy place, having obtained eternal redemp- 
tion for us :" # his intercession is carried on in 
heaven : he " is not entered into the holy places 
made with hands, which are the figures of the 
true ; but into heaven itself, there to appear in 
the presence of God for us."t Such a sacrifice 
neither Melchisedec nor Aaron ever offered; 
for, if they had, " the worshippers once purged, 
should have had no more conscience of sins. "J 
In which event, Messiah's priesthood would 
have been unnecessary ; for " where remission 
of sin is, there is no more offering for sin."§ It 
was the imperfection of the antecedent priest- 
hoods that rendered his necessary : and had his 
been the very same with them, the imperfection 
must have continued. But he assumed a per- 
fect priesthood, to which nothing w T as equal ; a 
priesthood, which finished transgression, and 
made an end of sin. We must, therefore, search 
for some other idea of order. 

The learned reader is not to be informed that 
the 4th verse of the 110th psalm admits, and 



* Heb. ix. 12. 


| Heb. ix. 24. 


% Heb. x. 2. 


\ Heb. x. 18. 


5 





-^ obwS jnrrnna 



50 PRIESTHOODS OF 

has received, very different translations. To 
analyse and refute, or establish these, would be 
toil without profit. All the light we can hope 
to receive must come from the lamp of the apos- 
tle Paul. The passage alluded to runs thus : — 

"The Lord hath sworn, 
and will not repent j Thou art 
a priest for ever, after the order 
of Melchisedec." 

The chief difficulty lies in the phrase vroTty, 
" after the order." Paul's translation, which 
is also that of the Septuagint, is xara 7rjv 7«giv : and 
as to the idea which he affixed to 7agiv, we collect 
it from his own synonyme, chap. vii. 15., xaral^v 
o,aojo7v]7ot MeXxitfsSex. " After the similitude of Mel- 
chisedec." There is another phrase, in the 
third verse, which also goes to fix the apostle's 
idea : Melchisedec is spoken of as one, a<pw|xoiw|xsvos 
twuiw 7* ©ss, " made like unto the Son of God." 
Thus then Messiah was made a priest, xala hv 
7agiv, " after the order," — that is, xa 7a hv o^oiolrfla, 
after the similitude" of Melchisidec. Or, in- 
verting the related ideas, Melchisedec, acp^oiu^svog 
lu) uiw 7^ <pex, " was constituted a similitude, or 
type, of the Son of God." Typical similitude, 
then, is the apostle's idea. 

But here we are met by a question of some 
apparent difficulty. Was not Aaron, it may be 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 51 

asked, a type of the Son of God : was there not 
a similitude between his and Messiah's priest- 
hood : and, if so, was not Jesus a priest after 
the similitude, or order of Aaron, as well as 
after the similitude, or order of Melchisedec ? 

The correctness of the assumption is ad- 
mitted ; viz., that Aaron was a type, or simili- 
tude of Messiah, in his priestly character. He 
was " called of God :"* he was " taken from 
among men ;"f and, " ordained for men, in things 
pertaining to God ;";}: he entered once a year into 
the most holy place, " not without blood ;"§ he 
served "unto the example, and shadow, of 
heavenly things ;"|| — The law, which had a 
shadow of good things to come, had not a sin- 
gle type of Messiah so illustrious as the high 
priest entering into the holiest of all, with the 
blood of atonement, and incense of intercession. 

The literal fact is, both the priesthood of 
Aaron, and that of Melchisedec, were types of 
the priesthood of Christ : Aaron and Melchise- 
dec, so far as their characters coincided, were 
types of equal value : both of them " priests of 
the Most High God ;" both " taken from among 
men, and ordained for men, in things pertaining 
to God ; w in sacrifice both shedding the blood 

* Heb. v. 4. f Heb. v. 1. J Heb. v. 1. 

& Heb. ix. 7. || Heb. viii. 5. 



52 PRIESTHOODS OF 

of atonement, and both making intercession 
with God, and blessing his church. So far, 
their typical character is perfectly equal ; and 
so far, Jesus is a priest after the similitude, or, 
if you will, the order of Aaron as much as of 
Melchisedec. This is a fact, which can neither 
be evaded, nor invalidated. It is a miserable 
species of criticism, that would sacrifice fact to 
verbiage. 

But why then is Messiah represented as a 
priest after the order of Melchisedec ? The 
reason is as follows. Melchisedec possessed 
all the typical characteristics of Aaron ; but, 
in addition to these, he had sundry peculiar cha- 
racteristics: now the priesthood of Jesus, which 
tallied exactly with all the typical characteris- 
tics of Melchisedec's, must be different from the 
priesthood of Aaron. So definitely were these 
peculiarities marked, that every candid and 
judicious observer must, on seeing him, exclaim, 
here is a priest, who is not an Aaronic priest ! 
This distinction of the priesthood of Jesus from 
the priesthood of Aaron is a most important 
point : to mark that distinction was the chief, 
perhaps I might say, the sole end of the type, 
and the sole end of the apostle's argument. 
These ideas will be illustrated in the two sub- 
sequent articles. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 53 

III. Why was Jesus exhibited in prophecy 
as a priest after the order of Melchisedec, and 
not after the order of Aaron ? 

If, as has been proved above, order means 
similitude; and if, as has also been proved, 
Jesus was after the similitude, or order of Aaron, 
as well as of Melchisedec; the Holy Spirit 
might with perfect truth have spoken of him, as 
a priest after the order of Aaron. Why was 
this not done? This question has important 
connections with the general subject of this dis- 
sertation ; and, as we do not recollect to have 
seen it discussed, we beg the indulgence of some 
detail. 

1. We say then, that Melehisedec's priest- 
hood was not made the exemplar of Christ's, by 
the Spirit of prophecy, because they were both 
the same priesthood — for we have proved them 
to be essentially different. 

2. Nor, because priest Melchisedec bore an 
exclusive resemblance to priest Messiah, for 
the contrary has been proved. 

3. Considerations wholly moral led to this 
exhibition. When David was directed to fore- 
tell that Messiah should be a priest, the Holy 
Spirit looked forward to the time when he 
should be revealed to the Jewish nation, and 
calculated the reception which such a priest 

5*. 



54 PRIESTHOODS OF 

might expect from that people. It was foreseen 
to what a pitch of vanity, their self-preference, 
or, as it is called, nationality, after having been 
accumulated by so many peculiar blessings, 
and nursed by such numerous interpositions of 
the Deity in their behalf, would carry the Jew- 
ish nation. It was foreseen that there was not 
one of their national institutions, on which they 
would set a more exorbitant value, than on 
their priesthood : this, by the atonement which 
it made for sin, would be viewed as the com- 
plement of that righteousness in which they 
would trust : and, being so often denominated 
an everlasting priesthood by their sacred wri- 
ters, they could imagine no less than that it 
should be interminable; and that God would 
never consecrate another priesthood, at least 
for them. In a word, the nation was foreseen 
wholly engrossed w T ith its typical priesthood. 

If then Messiah had been foretold as a priest 
after the order of Aaron j or, had he been fore- 
told as a priest without specification of order ; 
the Jews, according to their ideas of priesthood, 
could have anticipated nothing else than an 
Aaronic priest. It is true that this inference 
of theirs would be a logical non-sequitur ; for 
it does not follow that every priest must be an 
Aaronic priest ; nay, had Messiah been foretold 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 55 

as a priest after the order of Aaron, it would 
not follow that he should have the very same 
priesthood with Aaron; even as it does not 
follow from his being after the order of Mel- 
chisedec, that he has the very same priesthood 
with that man. But the Spirit of God does not 
deal with men upon the presumption that they 
will always reason justly. There is a moral 
logic, in which prejudices occupy the place of 
principles. And the Jewish prejudice on the 
subject of priesthood was foreseen. — It was 
foreseen that, in the age of Messiah, the Jewish 
nation would not be able to form any idea of a 
priesthood distinct from the Aaronic priesthood. 
And, of consequence, if he were foretold as a 
priest, they would expect an Aaronic priest. 
Let us suppose for a moment, that the phrase, 

AFTER THE ORDER OF MELCHISEDEC, W 7 ere Omitted 

in the prophecy contained in the 110th psalm. 
The passage would then read thus : — 

" Jehovah hath sworn, and will not repent — 
thou art a priest for ever." 

Now, be it remembered, that this oath is 
given to the son of David. What could the 
Jews, take them as they are, with all their pre- 
judices on the subject of priesthood about them; 
what could they make of this prophecy ? No- 
thing at all. Every argument which proved 



56 PRIESTHOODS OF 

Messiah to be a son of David — proved him to 
be no priest ; because, no son of Aaron. And, 
every argument which proved him to be a priest 
— proved him no son of David. For them to 
have so much as an idea of such a personage, 
was neither more nor less than an impossibility. 

Against this dilemma the Spirit of God 
guards them, in the 110th psalm. On the one 
hand, Messiah is to be the Son and Lord of 
David, and king on his father's throne. — On the 
other hand, he is constituted by the oath of 
God a priest. What sort of priest ? A priest 
after the order, or similitude, of Melchisedec ; 
and this Melchisedec was a king-priest, and had 
nothing to do with the blood of Levitical gene- 
alogy, nor with the priesthood entailed on that 
blood. Such a priest, therefore, as was after 
the order of Melchisedec, must be totally differ- 
ent from the priests of Levi. Thus, the whole 
and sole end of this prophecy is to exhibit Mes- 
siah as a priest, — and to distinguish him from 
the Aaronic priests. 

The foregoing argument would derive addi- 
tional interest from the ascertainment of one 
point. I feel strongly inclined to put it into 
round assertion ; but, perhaps, some may pre- 
fer the modesty of interrogation. I ask, then, 
if the 110th psalm be not the first explicit reve- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEBEC. 57 

lation of Messiah's priesthood ? That he was 
exhibited, in antecedent prophecies, as a pro- 
phet, and as a prince, is acknowledged. That 
he should suffer severely in bruising the serpent's 
head, was apparent from the first revelation 
ever made of him. And the typical rite of 
sacrifice might suggest that he should be a vic- 
tim. But was all this sufficient to exhibit him 
in the character of a priest ? I think not. And 
who before David ever described him as a 
priest ? If these views be correct, they commu- 
nicate an edge to the argument we have been 
urging. For it will then appear, that in the 
very first exhibition of his son, as the church's 
high priest, God drew a decisive line of distinc- 
tion between him and the existing order of 
priests, with whom there was danger of con- 
founding him — that when he appeared, he might 
be recognised as a priest, who by " one offer- 
ing" should for ever perfect them that are sanc- 
tified. Alas for blind erring mortals ! All this 
precaution was insufficient : as will appear in 
the following article. 

IV. The fourth and last question is — why 
did Paul find it necessary to argue this subject 
so pertinaciously with the Jews ? 

I dare appeal to the candid examiner of the 
scriptures, whether he has not found the vii. 



58 PRIESTHOODS OF 

chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews distress- 
ingly minute and tedious. So many profiles of 
the same subject are turned round to us ; so 
many arguments heaped together to prove a 
point, in our view of it, self-evident ; every pos- 
sible objection stated, every possible answer 
given : a doubting Jew can invent no new diffi- 
culty, Christian ingenuity can devise no new 
argument : every ray of light is collected, the 
apostle has left nothing for those who may come 
after him. An argument, managed in this man- 
ner, on a subject where we are already in pos- 
session of the truth, is the most exhausting 
thing, that can be imagined to the human intel- 
lect. Unquestionably, Paul would never have 
written in this style to the present Christian 
church. Unquestionably, there must have been 
some extraordinary derangement of ideas in the 
Jewish nation, and among the Christian part 
of it, to render such a style proper, and neces- 
sary for them. And this is the fact. And the 
wisdom of the divine Spirit shines in suiting his 
communications to the minds which are to be 
enlightened by them. 

However unexpected the fact, yet from the 
apostolic writings it appears to be a fact, that 
the opposition to our Lord's priesthood, which 
racked and tore the Christian church, under the 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 59 

eyes, and under the ministrations, of the apos- 
tles, was exclusively the work of Israelites. Did 
a Jew hesitate to believe ? Christ crucified was 
the stumbling-block: I. Cor. 1. 23. # Did he 
apostatise? It w r as by denying our Lord's 
priesthood; it was by crucifying to himself 
afresh the Son of God, and putting him to an 
open shame. Heb. vi. 6. It w r as by treading 
under foot the Son of God, and counting the 
blood of the covenant wherewith he w r as sanc- 
tified, an unholy thing. Heb. x. 29. With 
respect to the Gentiles, the case was different. 
Idolatries, drunkenness, revellings, lusts, and 
philosophy, falsely so called, were their beset- 
ting sins ; the obstructions to their conversion, 
and the incentives to their apostasy. This 
distinction between Jewish and Gentile charac- 
ter is perfectly consonant to the principles of 
human nature. It is precisely what we ought 
to expect from the natural and necessary ope- 
ration of those principles, under the respective 
moral circumstances alluded to. For, limiting 
the illustration to the case of apostasy, however 

* The phraseology of this passage is worthy of notice ; Christ 
crucified was to Gentiles foolishness, they could not well com- 
prehend the doctrine of salvation by his sufferings. The Jews 
understood the doctrine of vicarious sufferings, but confined it to 
their legal atonement ; and, therefore, to them Christ's sacrifice 
became a stumbling-block. 



60 PRIESTHOODS OF 

strongly a converted heathen might be tempted 
to relapse into his former debaucheries, there 
was little danger of his relapsing into his an- 
cient religion. It was impossible for him to 
unlearn, what he had already learned of the 
futility of idolatry, and all the rites and mum- 
meries of heathenism. To these, he never could 
trust his soul. His apostasy from Christianity, 
therefore, was rather a relapse into his former 
lusts, than a return to his former religion. Not 
so with the Jew. The moment he began, from 
whatever cause, to waver in his Christian pro- 
fession, his mind was irresistibly attracted to- 
wards his ancient religion : a religion, which he 
knew to be divine; which he was sure had 
saved his fathers ; which had a divine atone- 
ment for sin, offered up yearly, weekly, daily, 
almost incessantly ; and a divine order of priests 
to make it : a religion of consequence, in his 
view of it, to which he might safely trust his 
soul. Hence, an apostatising Jewish Christian 
always fled directly to the horns of the ancient 
altar. Of this assertion it may be esteemed 
sufficient proof to refer generally to the epistle 
to the Galatians ; take, however, the following 
quotation : — " If righteousness come by the law, 
then Christ is dead in vain. O foolish Gala- 
tians, who hath bewitched you, that you should 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 61 

not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus 
Christ hath been evidently set forth crucified 
among you ? This only would I learn of you, 
received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, 
or by the hearing of faith ? Are ye so foolish, 
having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made per- 
fect by the flesh ?"* 

Now, Paul had repeatedly refuted the erro- 
neous notions of his countrymen concerning 
the efficacy of Christ's death : sometimes ad- 
dressing himself to the unbelievers among them, 
sometimes attacking apostates, sometimes in- 
structing weak and doubting Christians. It 
would seem his labours had not the desired 
effect. This question, however, must be put to 
rest for ever, or Christianity perish among the 
race of Abraham. Paul, accordingly, writes 
this epistle professedly on the subject of our 
Lord's priesthood, and inscribes it to the Jews, 
where it was most needed. 

The precision and minuteness of the apostle's 
argumentation is exactly suited to an important 

* Gal. ii. 21. — iii. 1, 2, 3. Jesus crucified had been set before 
them ; they had adopted the new dispensation, or, begun in the 
Spirit, and had received the Holy Ghost, as the seal of their 
faith. — But they had got infatuated ; turned back to the law, or 
were made perfect by the flesh ,• and by trusting in the righte- 
ousness of the law, practically declared that in their opinion Christ 
had died in vain. 

6 



62 PRIESTHOODS OF 

subject, which had long been tortured by popu- 
lar debate. Such a subject will ever be w r arped 
and entangled with the mistakes and sophistries 
of the wise and the unwise: and, by the natural 
affinities of the human mind, will be incorporated 
with all the partialities and passions of those 
who have entered with zeal into the discussion. 
To handle such a subject well is no easy task. 
Those who are acquainted with the genius 
of Paul's writings will scarcely doubt that every 
paragraph in the 7th chapter of the epistle to 
the Hebrews contains an answer to some popu- 
lar objection. The remark is equally appli- 
cable to several other parts of the epistle. It 
is a notorious principle of this man's logical 
discussions, not always to state the error which 
he refutes. But we may, in many instances at 
least, ascertain the sophistries which w r ere float- 
ing through society, from the answers w T hich he 
has given them. Thus, when w 7 e find him 
arguing so strenuously that the law had only a 
shadow of good things to come, that it was 
impossible the blood of bulls and of goats 
should take away sin, that perfection could not 
be by the Levitical priesthood ; — we may be sure 
that the Jews had urged that they were already 
possessed of an atonement, prescribed in their 
law, and had a divine order of priests to make 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 63 

that atonement. When we hear him alleging 
the oath of God, that Jesus should be a priest, 
and after the order of Melchisedec, not of Aaron 
— who will doubt that the Jews had pleaded, 
that Jesus could not be a priest, because not of 
Aaron 's family. In fine, when we consider his 
laboured and artful introduction, and the minute- 
ness of his argument, we feel sure that this 
subject was <Wsp^vsu7ov, hard to be explained, to 
the satisfaction of Israelites. 

" As in water face answereth to face, so the 
heart of man to man ;" and so the different 
aspects of affairs in human society. Almost 
every reader will be able to recollect some sub- 
ject, which he has seen invade and agitate the 
public mind. Men and women, old and young, 
enter the lists of argument with equal ardour : 
the whole community converted in a day, into 
litigious disputants. After the subject has been 
puzzled and confounded out of all intelligibility ; 
when what was clear has become obscure, what 
was certain, dubious; when fact and fiction, 
when sophism and argument, are at a dead 
match ; and nought remains to the litigants, 
save their original zeal, and growing animosity; 
then, perhaps, he may have seen a wise man 
come forward to settle the debate. But, what 
a mortifying task ! How was he to prove, what 



64 PRIESTHOODS OF CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 

ought to be conceded ? How many trifles, light 
as air, must he honour with a formal refuta- 
tion ? and how often must he meet the same 
sophism, dressed up in new habiliments, and 
insisting on once more trying the fate of battle ? 
Let not those who stand aloof, pronounce that 
man tedious. Such precisely was Paul's case. 
Here closes the second part of our disserta- 
tion. The question is, no doubt, a Jewish one. 
To us, the apostle's argument is far from being 
so interesting as it was to those for whom he 
wrote. It may be questioned, if one of a mil- 
lion of Christians now living, ever conceived 
any incongruity between our Lord's tribe and 
priesthood. In the general theme, however, 
our interest is not small. On the priesthood 
and atonement of Jesus rest all our hopes of 
life everlasting. Would Paul have so pleaded 
for a nullity, or a mere figure of speech ! 



PART III. 

We have at length arrived where the reader 
probably long since wished to find us. We 
enter on the analysis of the vii. chapter of the 
epistle to the Hebrews. The nature of our dis- 
course forbids us to follow the apostle step by 
step, in the manner of a commentator. By bring- 
ing together the different parts of his discourse, 
under the different heads to which they belong, 
we hope to give perspicuity and distinctness 
to each of them. We hold ourselves bound to 
give every phrase, and word, quoted, (and 
every phrase, and word, essential to the argu- 
ment shall be quoted) the precise meaning 
which it bears in the Apostle's discourse. And 
then such of our readers as choose to incur the 
trouble may apply our interpretations to the 
subjects as they lie in the sacred text. Should 
we succeed, w r e will have furnished a real com- 
mentary. — The following are our topics: 

I. Melchisedec's person. 

II. His royalty and kingdom, so far as they 
were typical. 

III. The extraordinary terms in which the 
apostle speaks of him: viz, "without father," &c. 

IV. The duration of his prieshood. 

6 # (65) 



66 PRIESTHOODS OF 

V. Its dignity. 

VI. A comparison of the typical priesthood 
of Melchisedec, with the antitypical priesthood 
of Jesus. 

I. Who was Melchisedec ? 

Led away by the mere sound of words, com- 
mentators have formed the most extravagant 
ideas of this personage. To mention and refute 
their hypotheses will gratify curiosity j it will, 
besides, expose the danger of mysticism in inter- 
preting the scriptures. The utmost brevity 
shall be studied. 

1. Some will have Melchisedec to be an Angel. 

But this is absurd. 1. Because the scrip- 
tures never ascribe the priestly office to an 
angel. 2. Because they teach that every priest 
is taken from among men. 3. Because, were 
he an angel, it would be mere trifling to tell us 
he was without mother ; false to assert he was 
without beginning of days ; useless to inform us 
he was without end of life j and absolute imper- 
tinence to assure us that his genealogy was not 
reckoned from the priests of Levi. 

2. Some say he is the Holy Ghost. 

But this is still more intolerable. 1. Because 
the Holy Ghost is never represented as a 
priest : and his office, in the economy of re- 
demption, looks toward men, whom he sancti- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 67 

fies ; whereas, the priest's office looks towards 
God, to whom atonement and intercession are 
made. 2. Because he is never exhibited as a 
type of Christ. 3. Because, granting the hy- 
pothesis, we w 7 ould then have two equal priests : 
and yet one of them would have no offering, 
and of course could make no intercession, not 
being qualified to enter into the holy place with 
blood. 4. It would be w r orse than nonsense 
to tell us the Holy Ghost is without father or 
mother, and does not reckon his genealogy from 
the Aaronic priests. 

3. Some insist that he is none other than the 
Son of God himself, who assuming the appear- 
ance, or reality, of humanity, exhibited to Abra- 
ham an early picture of his future priesthood. 

This is all over contemptible. — 1. Because 
every high priest is taken from among men ; the 
appearance of humanity is not enough. — 2. Be- 
cause, if he was at that time a priest, and dis- 
charged the duties of his office, he must have 
" suffered often," (twice) " from the beginning 
of the world ;" and not " by the once offering up 
of himself, have for ever perfected them who 
are sanctified:" then, moreover, Abraham would 
have received the promised blessing, contrary 
to the scriptures : and, in fine, the appearance 
of the Son of God, as the Son of Mary, was 
superfluous. If, to avoid those absurdities, it 



68 PRIESTHOODS OF 

be alleged that though he appeared as a priest, 

he did not discharge the duties of his office : 

then, in the first place, he is degraded into a 

mere pageant, an officer without functions : and, 

in the second place, he is stripped of all typical 

character ; for the priest who neither sacrifices, 

nor intercedes, can never be a type of one who 

does both. — 3. Because, if Melchisedec was the 

Son of God, whether in real humanity, or only 

in its appearance, he must have been a type 

of himself ; the ideas of identity and similarity 

are confounded ; and Paul, instead of saying, 

a<pwfi.oiwfjbsvi£ y Uh 7h <&>£, that he was " made like to 

the Son of God," should have said, W v s hog 7* (peg, 

that he was the Son of God. — 4. Because it 

would be unworthy the manly sense of Paul, to 

say nothing of inspiration, to labour through a 

long dissertation to prove a mere truism, which 

it would disgrace an idiot to utter, and insult a 

child to offer for information; namely, that 

Messiah's priesthood was very like itself. — 6. 

Because it would be extremely irreverent to 

suppose that the adorable God lifted up his 

hand and swore, that his Son's priesthood should 

be like his Son's priesthood. An indentical 

proposition does not require such a solemn 

confirmatioh. But enough : proof is complete 

when absurdity is exposed. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 69 

Melchisedec was a man. 

This follows from what has been said. But, 
if the reader should prefer direct evidence, to 
an inference from negative propositions, it is 
an easy matter to gratify him. For, 

1. The historical evidence is complete. We 
have the same evidence to believe that Mel- 
chisedec was a man, as that Abraham and the 
king of Sodom were men. By what plea is 
such evidence to be set aside ? 

2. His priesthood proves his humanity. For 
if, as the apostle says, Heb. v. 1., every high 
priest be taken from among men, this high priest 
must be a man. 

3. As all the other personal types of Messiah 
were men, so must this personal type. And, in- 
deed, it is altogether inconceivable, how a being, 
not possessed of human nature, should be a 
type of priest Messiah, in human nature. 

4. The apostle's argument requires, on many 
accounts, that Melchisedec should be a man : 
for instance, if he were not a man, but the Son 
of God, the Holy Ghost, or an angel, (for other 
supposition is inconceivable,) why should Paul 
call his brethren to behold and admire his supe- 
riority over Abraham ? 

But, perhaps, too much, on so very plain a 
subject. No reader, not far gone in criticism, 
ever did imagine, from the scriptural account of 



70 PRIESTHOODS OF 

him, that Melchisedec was any thing else than 
a man. Some phrases in the 7th chapter of the 
epistle to the Hebrews, owing, in reality, to an 
imperfect translation, may puzzle a common 
reader. Of these he will say, " Si non vis intel- 
ligi nolo ego intelligere," if you will not be un- 
derstood, I shall not understand you. But still 
he will adhere to it, that Melchisedec was a 
human being. Let what will be dark, this is 
clear. It is reserved for the affected ingenuity 
of spurious criticism, to affix a random meaning 
to obscure phrases, and then to make the plain- 
est language forego its sense in favour of the 
hypothesis. Pranks of this kind, not a few, 
have been played on the subject under consi- 
deration. Hence, the labour of interpretation 
has been increased on our hands. Be this the 
apology of minuteness. 

One more enquiry on this head remains. 
What particular man was Melchisedec ? Enoch 
— Shem — Ham — Canaan — a Canaanitish 
prince — a descendant of Japhet — Job ? Each 
of these conjectures has had its advocates, not 
one of them has a particle of evidence, and it 
would be a waste of time and toil, to sit down 
to weigh the respective merits of unsupported 
conjectures. The fact is, we do not know, and 
we do not care, who he was. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 71 

II. Of his royalty and kingdom. 
Heb. vii. 

L 1. "For this Melchisedec, 

' kino: ot balem, priest of the 

'• Molt High God.-2. First.be- 

ing by interpretation, king of 

righteousness : and after that, 

^ . , also king of fealem, which is, 

fans' of peace. 

We have here a Greek translation of the 
name of Melchisedec, and of the name of the 
city where he reigned : both, therefore, are 
brought into the typical group. 

In the Hebrew tongue iSd, Melech, signifies 
king, and piar, Zedek, righteousness : and the 
name jr«M2pD, Melchisedec, signifies &tng o/* 
righteousness, or righteous king. If the charac- 
ter of this prince corresponded with his name, 
(which is to be supposed,) his government must 
have been distinguished by righteousness. And 
thus he is, both in name and conduct, a noble 
similitude of that king, whom God ordained to 
reign in righteousness over Zion. Whether 
his name was r— ; ; ., or immediately imposed 
by God; or whether, under the direction of 
Providence, it was given him by his parents in 
hope that his conduct would realise the title ; 
or by his subjects, or the neighbouring nations, 
as an honorary reward for his political justice, 
we know not. Be these things as they may, the 



72 PRIESTHOODS OF 

apostle, by interpreting the name, has taught us 
that it is typical. And yet we do not assert 
that the royalty and righteousness of this man, 
separately viewed, constituted him a type of 
Messiah; but viewed in connection with his 
priesthood, they did. A righteous king-priest 
was an illustrious type of Messiah. 

This man was also dSb^d, Melech-Salem, 
king of peace. It may be questioned whether 
this was not, like the former, a name of the 
man : in which view he would be called Me- 
lechsalem, from his pacific policy ; as he was 
called Melchisedec for his righteous adminis- 
stration. The general opinion however is that 
nhw, Salem, was the name of his city : and the 
opinion has this much in its favour, that Da- 
vid uses Melchisedec as the name of the man, 
and not Melechsalem. Be it then the name of 
his city : for nothing can be gained by farther 
criticism. This name in the Hebrew language 
signifies peace, and the apostle's translating it, 
proves it typical. We ventured to presume that 
Melchisedec's conduct corresponded with his 
name : may we not also risk a conjecture that 
the condition of Salem corresponded with its 
name. The language would then correspond 
with the facts, and both would be typical. Mel- 
chisedec a righteous king, reigning over Salem, 
a peaceful city, and being at the same time Priest 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 73 

of the Most High God, was an excellent type 
of that High Priest, who reigns in righteous- 
ness, over the peaceful city of our God. 

But whatever may have been the conduct of 
Melchisedec, or conditio?! of his city ; the asso- 
ciation of the two titles belongs to the essence 
of the type. They are the two eyes of the pic- 
ture, concentrating their vision on the same 
object. A righteous king and a peaceful city ! 
in the type, and in the antitype. This is that 
natural connection between cause and effect, 
which the Creator has established in the con- 
stitution of human things : the natural connection 
between virtue and happiness, which it is the 
business of his moral government to maintain. 
Truth, however, extorts the reluctant concession, 
and it issues from the lips in a sigh drawn deep 
from the bottom of the heart, that the most 
righteous governor, and peaceably inclined 
community, may, through the violence of for- 
eign aggression, be compelled to unsheath the 
defensive sword. Still political justice extin- 
guishes half the causes of war, by forbearing 
those injuries which provoke retaliation. Whe- 
ther it be considered as the natural tendency of 
things, or be rather viewed as the earthly retri- 
bution which God, for the encouragement of 
virtue, grants to righteousness in the present 
7 



74 PRIESTHOODS OF 

world, the fact is certain, and the decree divine, 
"That the work of righteousness shall be peace, 
and the effect of righteousness quietness and 
assurance for ever." It is a truth which no 
squeamish delicacy may modify, no sinister mo- 
tive repress, that the permanency of warlike 
character in a nation, rarely, if ever, results 
from the infelicity of its situation ; but from its 
injustice. And they have their reward. Let 
them drink down their cup of blood and tears, 
poisoned w r ith deadly guilt : this is but the be- 
ginning of their sorrows. 

III. Of the extraordinary terms in which the 
apostle speaks of Melchisedec : viz., without 
father, fyc. 

The terms alluded to are, indeed, but few. 
And the difficulty in ascertaining their mean- 
ing has arisen entirely from considering them 
detachedly from the drift of the apostle's argu- 
ment, and from synonymous phrases which fix 
their signification beyond all reasonable ques- 
tion. Paul's design is to prove that as Melchi- 
sedec, who was constituted the pattern of priest 
Messiah, was wholly distinct from the priests of 
Aaron's family, so of consequence must Jesus 
be. In effecting this design, he proves, first, that 
Melchisedec was in reality a priest : Upsvg 7* <pss 
u^ijs, priest of the Most High God. No argu- 






JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 75 

rnent against the reality of his priesthood could 
be ventured without contradicting both Moses 
and David. The next point, is to prove that 
this priest had nothing to do with the Jewish 
order of priest. This fact certainly was plain 
enough : yet the apostle states it, repeats it 
again and again, and expresses it in all possible 
variety of phrase ; obviously with no other view 
than to keep it so long before the eyes of the 
Jews, that they should be compelled to admit that 
there was, and must be, a priesthood different 
from the Jewish priesthood. If that fact was 
once believed, the rest of his argument would 
give him little trouble. In the following passage 
he expresses the fact in terms as simple and 
plain as mortal man could use. Heb. vii. 11, 15. 
" If, therefore, perfection were by the Levitical 
priesthood, (for under it the people received the 
law,) what further need was there that another 
priest should arise after the order of Melchise- 
dec, and not be called after the order of Aaron ? 
For the priesthood being changed, there is made 
of necessity a change also of the law. For he 
of whom these things are spoken, pertaineth to 
another tribe, of which no man gave attendance 
at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord 
sprang out of Judah, of which tribe Moses 
spake nothing concerning priesthood. And it is 



76 PRIESTHOODS OF 

vet far more evident, for that after the similitude 
of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest." 
Never was language more perspicuous and defi- 
nite. There was a priest, Melchisedec, totally- 
distinct from the Aaronic priest — It was fore- 
told that Messiah should arise after the order 
of that priest, and not after the order of Aaron 
— That he should be of the tribe of Judah, of 
consequence not a Levitical priest — And there- 
fore perfection was not by the Levitical priest- 
hood, &c. &c, and as the priesthood was 
changed, so also must be the law. 

Of so much consequence is the fact of Mel- 
chisedec's distinct priesthood : and in such plain 
terms does the apostle state it, and argue from 
it. Yet in another part of his discourse he states 
this self -same fact, in terms, which have created 
amazing confusion of ideas, and subjected his 
whole discourse to the imputation of mystery 
and darkness, with what justice, it may be pre- 
mature to say : the sequel perhaps may deter- 
mine. The passage is as follows. 
Heb. vii. 3. 

a™™ a as- " Without father, without 

*a<rug, afwiTwj, ay moi \ ieY ^ without descent, 

vaaXoyi™*, M tb a^v ( genea]og y 9 ) having neither 

^e fW v, pipe £«*» 7sAos beginning of days nor end 
5 WX wv. of life." 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 77 

1. In interpreting these phrases some have 
imagined, that the apostle intended to deny that 
Melchisedec had any human descent. The ex- 
pressions cMr«TW£, without father ; a/jwjrwf, without 
mother ; aysvsaXoyr^og, without descent ; ^Is cc£X*» v 
fcwjwv, wis Purjg ?£Xos s X ^ 9 having neither beginning 
of days nor end of life ; have been supposed to 
import that Melchisedec had neither Father, nor 
Mother ; nor birth, nor death: in plain terms, 
that he was not a human being ; but, (the only 
remaining suppositions) an angel, the Holy 
Ghost, or the Son of God. These conjectures 
have been weighed in the balance : and Tekel 
is their indelible brand. 

2. Some have thought that Paul simply de- 
nies to Melchisedec priestly succession. — It is 
true, that Melchisedec had neither predecessor, 
nor successor, in his priesthood ; whereas, the 
Jewish priesthood had a succession of priests : 
it is also true, that this circumstance did consti- 
tute him, in preference to any Jewish priest, a 
type of Messiah, ch. vii. 23, 24. But it is just as 
true, that the apostle makes no allusion in the 
third verse, to that fact. Try the idea, and see 
how far it will go. Melchisedec was without 
predecessor or successor. It is a most natural 
and common figure, to call predecessors in office 

our fathers : let it be then, that Melchisedec was 

7 # 



78 PRIESTHOODS OF 

oMoflug, without father, that is, without a predeces- 
sor in his priesthood. But what shall we do with 
afjt*i7w£, without mother ? Was she intended for 
his successor, or for another predecessor, in the 
priesthood ? If she could neither be his prede- 
cessor, nor his successor, why was her name in- 
troduced ? This blows up the whole hypothesis. 
However, let us go to the other phrases : p$b 
HXw ^sgwv, p/7s Quvig isXos s^wv, having neither be- 
ginning of days nor end of life, must, according 
to the hypothesis, mean that his priesthood had 
neither beginning nor end. A strange human 
priesthood, a strange type ! But the fact is, his 
priesthood had both a beginning and an end : 
and we must not so interpret the apostle as to 
make him assert a most unfeasible falsehood. 
3. A third hypothesis is this, namely, a nega- 
tion of human genealogy. As this seems at first 
sight to have some features of verisimilitude, let 
us examine it a little. From its derivation, and 
use, ysvsakoyia, genealogy, means a register of a 
man's descent : ysveoCkoyrfog, is of course a man 
whose name is entered in some genealogical 
register : and aysvsaXoy^rog is a man whose name is 
not entered in any such register. Now, say some, 
Melchisedec is aysvsaXoyyjTos, without genealogy, 
because w r e do not find his name in the genea- 
logical registers of the Bible : the scriptures are 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 79 

silent as to his father's name, his mother's name, 
his birth and his death. And this silence of 
scripture constitutes him a type of Christ. 
Neither will this do. For : 

1. It erects a mere negation, a blank, a 
nothing, into a type. This is so entirely a type 
that it is nothing else. All the other types have 
an individual essence, and answered important 
purposes in their respective ages, besides their 
typical reference. But here is a type, which is 
nothing but a type. In the whole range of 
types, is there such another? 

2. But the grand objection is that admitting 
the hypothesis, the type and antitype clash and 
contradict each other in every point and parti- 
cular: Melchisedec, the type, is without gene- 
alogy ; his father and mother, his birth and his 
death, are all unknown. Jesus, the antitype has 
a genealogy, Matthew gives us his genealogy in 
one line of ancestry, Luke in another : a double 
genealogy. He is therefore not without gene- 
alogy. He is not afavug, without father, nor 
ajMjT«£, without mother, on record. If you en- 
quire of his race, he was of the seed of Abra- 
ham, of the tribe of Judah, of the family of 
David; God was his father in heaven, and Joseph 
bore a father's name, and discharged a father's 
duty, among men ; and as to his mother, she is 



80 PRIESTHOODS OF 

known over all Christendom to have been Mary. 
Moreover, his " beginning of days" and "end of 
life," or his birth and death, are recorded with a 
circumstantial precision almost as extraordinary 
as their importance. Here is no type, no simil- 
itude whatever, but visible and tangible contrast 
all over. 

But there is yet something more extraordinary 
still. Assuming, what never can be proved, that 
the silence of the scriptures respecting the pa- 
rentage, birth and death of Melchisedec, that is 
that a mere blank, can constitute a type: the 
difficulty is to find the analogous particulars in 
Messiah. The argument of the foregoing para- 
graph seems to indicate that the task will not 
be an easy one. It has however been attempted. 
And an hypothesis, so out of the common track 
of thought, has been found out, that its very 
extravagance seems to astonish us into belief. 
It is this. That as Melchisedec is without/a//*er, 
mother, birth or death, recorded in scripture, so 
Jesus is really without father as man, and with- 
out mother, birth, or death, as God. It is per- 
fectly understood that the shadow of disrespect 
to the great names, which have lent their sanc- 
tion to this interpretation, would be highly 
indecorous, and equally fatal to the presumption 
which should offer it. And, verily no disrespect 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 81 

is felt, or intended, towards men, whom genius, 
piety, and public services have consecrated to 
the admiration and love of the Christian com- 
monwealth. But truth has prior claims : and it 
is no disrespect to any one to withhold assent 
where evidence is not furnished. We therefore 
must refuse credence to this singular hypothesis. 

1. Because, as the human genealogy of our 
Lord is sufficiently recorded, the word ayevsakvysrost 
without genealogy, must relate to his divinity : 
and then the apostle's language amounts to, 
neither more nor less, than, that genealogical 
records are not kept in heaven. If this sentiment 
should appear improper to the reader, let him 
reflect that the impropriety lies wholly in the 
idea, and not in any misjudged and indecorous 
queerness of expression, which on so solemn a 
subject would be less indecent than criminal. 
On earth our Lord had a genealogy ; if he was 
without genealogy, it must be above. I cannot 
believe this to be an inspired idea. And the 
next is like it. For : 

2. The idea of God's being without a mother, 
is not like that weight of wisdom, which drops 
from inspired lips. It is a truth, but surely not 
one worth the telling ; not so dark in the days 
of David and Paul, as to need being prefigured 
by types, or illuminated by dissertation. 



82 PRIESTHOODS OF 

After all, if both the above extremely awk- 
ward expressions, in the sense given to them, 
be put together, they amount to just this, that 
Messiah is God. This indeed was a doctrine 
which Paul laboured to establish: and mark 
what mighty weapons he wields in that warfare. 
It is the perfections of the deity which Jesus 
displays — it is his creation of the universe — his 
government, and final disposition of the universe 
— his superiority over all creatures — and the 
lofty terms, inapplicable to a creature, in which 
his father speaks of him — these, and such as 
these, are the apostle's arguments for the Deity 
of his Lord. And who can believe, that from 
this elevation, worthy of an inspired man, and 
worthy of such a theme, he would stoop down 
to the miserable puniness of telling the church 
that her Saviour, the Son of God, had as God, 
no mother ; had no genealogical register in the 
Archives of heaven ! 

3. I object to the interpretation, because it 
does not treat the type and antitype on the same 
principle of illustration. The apostle speaks of 
a genealogy, parentage, birth and death which a 
priest might have ; and denies that Melchisedec 
had them. The interpretation speaks of a gene- 
alogy and parentage, with respect to Jesus, 
which were impossible. Now the true, and only 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 83 

true, principle of interpretation is to deny the 
very same genealogy, parentage, birth and death 
to both Christ and Melchisedec. But to change 
the terms, and deny one species of parentage and 
genealogy to the one, and a different species of 
genealogy and parentage to the other, is to get 
rid of the very idea of a type. 

It is what logicians call an argument " on all 
fours ;" or a syllogism with four terms: as if one 
should say, John has money, and Thomas has 
wisdom : therefore — nothing. Melchisedec has 
no register of his parentage, birth and death, Mes- 
siah has no parentage,birth or death : therefore — 
nothing. You cannot infer from the premises 
whether they are like, or unlike each other; 
whether they are different persons, ox the same 
person. 

It is somewhat worthy of observation into 
what a vortex one wrong idea will hurl the 
greatest minds. Some after affirming that it is 
the silence of the scriptures respecting the gene- 
alogy of Melchisedec, which constitutes him a 
type of Messiah ; proceed the next moment to 
tell us who he was, and w r ho was his father ; and 
frequently pitch upon men, whose genealogy can 
be traced to Adam. There are not wanting 
others to rebuke their audacious attempt : and 



84 PRIESTHOODS OF 

to remind them, that to seek after the purposely 
concealed genealogy of this man, is nothing less 
than an effort to defeat the divine wisdom, to 
contradict the divine Spirit, and to destroy a 
glorious type of Messiah ! Let all this zeal cool 
down. For should the autograph of Melchi- 
sedec's genealogical register be produced ; or 
should an angel descend and certify us of his 
father and mother ; and of the year, month, day 
and hour, on which he was born ; and of those, 
on which he died ; it would not affect a single 
point in his typical character, nor discredit a 
single scriptural expression respecting him. It 
would in fact be the best possible commentary 
on Paul's language ; it would verify the whole 
of his argument : for it would prove that Mel- 
chisedec was not an Aaronic priest — had no 
genealogy among those priests — which is the 
very fact the apostle asserts. For — 

LEVITICAL GENEALOGY 

Is what the apostle denies to Melchisedec ; and 
of consequence Levitical priesthood. The very 
same genealogy he denies to Jesus; verses 13, 
14, — and with it Levitical priesthood, chap. viii. 
4. And this was one point of similitude between 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 85 

them, that both were priests, and neither of 
them an Aaronic priest. But to proceed with 
the analysis. 

It is customary with the inspired writers, 
when they introduce a difficulty, to leave a key 
appended to the lock : it is scarcely less custo- 
mary for their interpreters to neglect that key, 
and to go to the laboratories of learning and cri- 
ticism, to have one forged ; which, (when they 
have got it,) grates in the lock and discomposes 
its wards, but never will open it. The apostle 
has left his own key to this passage ; if indeed, 
which I very much doubt, he considered it as 
containing a difficulty. What we need as a 
key, and therefore may call it by that name, is 

found in the 6. Verse, o Ss [kr\ ysvsoLhoyxpeoZ eg aurwv, 

" he whose genealogy is not reckoned from 
them ; viz., the sons of Levi who received the 
office of priesthood. This then is the whole 
matter, a negation of Levitical genealogy. Mel- 
chisedec, says Paul, is a/svsaXoyqros, without gene- 
alogy : — that is, m ysveakoy^svog eg cwtwv, without 
Levitical genealogy. 

But what shall we do w T ith a^a^, a^™f, wre 

Kgxw fttf^w, m^ £&ns TsXog e X ^. " Without father, 

without mother, without beginning of days or 

end of life?" I answer, this is nothing else 

8 



86 PRIESTHOODS OF 

than a circumstantial verbal description of a 
Levitical genealogical register. 

The following diagram may serve to convey 
an idea of such register. 



NAME. 


father's name. 


mother's name. 


BIRTH. 


DEATH. 


M. 


c. 


D. 


p. 


E. 



that is, M — ; Son of C — , and D — ; born P — ; 
died E— 

Turn over all the genealogical registers of 
Levi, and you will not find Melchisedec's name, 
ayevsaXoyqros, he is, " without genealogy : nor his 
father's name, he is a^ar^, "without father:" 
nor his mother's name, he is a^™*, " without 
mother :" and both the column containing the 
register of births, and. that containing the re- 
gister of deaths, are empty ; ^ts agxw ^s^v, ^ts 
£w*]g tsXos sx wv » " having neither beginning of days 
nor end of life ;" neither his birth, nor death 
are recorded in those registers. If I be not 
egregiously mistaken, the above interpretation 
carries evidence along with it, which will com- 
mend itself to the candid mind. Lest however 
it should be considered as only one of the many 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 87 

fancies, which have been broached on this pas- 
sage, a few remarks shall be made on each of 
the foregoing particulars. 

It is by no means insinuated, or supposed, 
that the diagram submitted to the reader is any- 
thing like a facsimile of a Levitical genealo- 
gical register. But it shall be proved that every 
one of the above particulars did enter into those 
registers, in whatever particular form they may 
have been kept : it shall also be proved that no 
man, in any case whatever, could be admitted 
to the priesthood, without producing his gene- 
alogical register. And from these facts any 
one can infer, that to assert a man had no Levi- 
tical genealogy, w r as the same thing as to assert 
he was not a Levitical priest. 

1. A genealogical register, produced from the 
official records of the family of Levi, was the 
only evidence by which a man's right to officiate 
as a priest, could be established. A pregnant 
proof of this fact we have, Ezra ii. 61 — 63. "And 
of the children of the priests : the children of 
Habaiah, the children of Koz ; the children of 
Barzillai : which took a wife of the daughters 
of Barzillai, the Gileadite, and was called after 
their name \ these sought their register among 
those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they 



88 PRIESTHOODS OF 

were not found; therefore, were they as polluted 
put from the priesthood. And the Tirshatha 
said unto them, that they should not eat of the 
most holy things till there stood up a priest 
with Urim and Thummim." 

This happened after a captivity of 70 years ; 
and after the disorders and mischances anavoid- 
able in the deportation and return of the nation; 
circumstances, which must have proved fatal to 
many documents public and private. Yet under 
these circumstances, which made the case, what 
is called a hard case, a genealogical register is 
exacted as the only admissible evidence of a right 
to the priesthood: and a failure taking place 
with regard to the production of that evidence, 
these men of acknowledged priestly descent, are 
" as polluted put from the priesthood :" and be- 
cause the legal evidence could not be produced, 
no human power could grant redress ; and they 
must submit to the privation till a priest should 
arise with Urim and Thummim, who might bring 
the case before the tribunal of the Supreme 
Judge. So much for the importance of gene- 
alogies, in a question respecting Levitical priest- 
hood. 

2. It remains to be proved that those gene- 
alogical registers contained precisely the items, 
which the apostle mentions. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 89 

1. The father's name was essential: for none 
but the son of a priest could, on any condition, 
be admitted to the priesthood. Exod. xxviii. 1. 
I Chron. xxiv. 

2. The mother's name was equally essential : 
for the son of a priest by an improper mother 
was detruded from the priestly office, Lev* xxi. 
13_15. "And he" (the high priest) " shall take 
a wife in her virginity. A widow, or a divorced 
woman, or profane, or an harlot, these shall he 
not take : but he shall take a virgin of his own 
people to wife. Neither shall he profane" (that 
is secularise, or reduce from the state of priest- 
ly consecration, to the rank of a common Israel- 
ite) " his seed among his people : for I the Lord 
do sanctify him," Ezek. xliv. 22. "Neither shall 
they" (the priests) " take for their wives a wid- 
ow, or her that is put away : but they shall take 
maidens of the seed of the house of Israel, or a 
widow that had a priest before." 

From which it appears that if a Jewish priest 
should marry, not an Israelitish virgin, nor 
the widow of a priest, but the widow of a com- 
mon Israelite, or a divorced woman, &c. the 
issue of such a marriage w r ould be desecra- 
ted, or profaned among the people, and exclu- 
ded from the service and privileges of the 
altar. 

8* 



90 PRIESTHOODS OF 

Of consequence the genealogical register, 
which alone could establish a man's right to 
the priesthood, must contain both his father's 
name, and his mother's, that it might appear, 
that the former was a priest, and the latter 
such a woman as could, according to law, be 
the mother of a priest. 

3. The same register must contain the time 
of his birth " or his beginning of days," as 
Paul has it. For as the priests entered on 
the discharge of their office at thirty years 
of age, and ceased from officiating at fifty, 
the date of their birth was necessary to fix 
both the commencement and termination of 
their service, Numb. iv. 1 — 3. 

4. It is not easy to assign any special 
cause for registering the death of priests, or, 
in Paul's words, their " end of life :" unless 
any one should suppose that it subserved regu- 
larity in filling vacancies. Yet there is no 
reason to doubt that such an entry found a 
place in the Levitical records. For, in ad- 
dition to the common motives which incline 
all people to make the decease of friends a 
matter of record, it is worthy of remark, that 
in all the ancient genealogical registers, ante- 
diluvian, and postdiluvian, this item is con- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 91 

stantly found. The reader is referred to the 
antediluvian genealogy from Adam to Noah, 
Gen. v., and to the postdiluvian genealogy 
from Shem to Abraham, Gen. xi* These 
ancient records no doubt furnished the race 
of Abraham with a copy for theirs, and though 
they might add to the items of the antique 
pattern, there is no reason to imagine that 
they detracted from them; for the motives 
to precision had grown upon their hands. 
And this, for the tenuity of the subject, may 
suffice. 

It is hoped that what has been offered will 
have evinced that the language of Paul, in 
the passage under consideration, is nothing 
else than a verbal description of a Levitical 
genealogical register: in which every object 
is made to pass slowly before the eye, for 
the purpose of fixing an indelible impression 
on the mind, of a priesthood distinct from 
Aaron's, and the type of Messiah's. In this 
view every phrase has its definite and ample 
meaning : a meaning compatible with good 



* In this genealogy the phrase, "and he died," is omitted. 
But its effect is produced, by stating the number of years each 
patriarch lived. 



92 PRIESTHOODS OF 

sense, corresponding with the facts of ancient 
history, and according with the scope of the 
apostle's argument: a meaning, moreover, 
illustrated and confirmed by other phrases of 
kindred and indisputable signification, in the 
discourse. 

Melchisdec, says Paul, after w r hose simili- 
tude Jesus is constituted a priest by the oath 
of God, has nothing to do with your Levit- 
ical priesthood. His priesthood could not be 
established by your law : (^s ysvsa\oy^svog gg avrw) 
he reckons not his genealogy from your priests. 
Search all the records of the tribe of Levi, 
Melchisedec (aysvscChoyriTos) is without genealogy 
there. Search minutely: do you find his fa- 
ther's name ? No : (Warc^) he is without 
father. Can you find his mother's name? 
No : (ap]<ro£) he is without mother. Have you 
fallen upon the record of his birth? No, nor 

of hlS death : (f^rs oc^tjv ^sjgjv, jmvjrs £wt]S <rsXos 

s^wv) he has neither beginning of days nor 
end of life recorded here. Very well, exclaims 
Paul, here you have a Priest of the Most 
High God, who has nothing to do with your 
Levitical priesthood : a priest, after whose si- 
militude God has sworn to constitute the 
priesthood of his son. The negation of Aa- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 93 

ronic priesthood, therefore, is no prejudice to 
the priesthood of Jesus: Nay, but it is a 
confirmation of that priesthood. For you to 
expect that God should constitute Messiah 
a priest after the order of Aaron, is to ex- 
pect that he should violate his oath ; and to 
deny that Messiah is a priest, is to maintain 
that God has violated his oath. 

We have now weathered the Cape of Storms, 
or rather let us call it the Cape of Good Hope, 
for henceforth our voyage will be safe, and 
perhaps we may return enriched with some of 
the treasures of the east. A single error in 
any first principle of an argument propagates 
and reproduces itself through the whole train 
of conclusions ; and these new errors, leading 
still to further errors, will be in number and 
magnitude directly proportioned to the logical 
accuracy of the understanding employed in 
the discussion. On the other hand, the detec- 
tion of the prime error leads to an easy refu- 
tation of all its consequences. That task in 
relation to the present discourse is now r accom- 
plished. But to proceed. 



94 



PRIESTHOODS OF 



IV. Of the duration of Melchisedec's priest- 
hood. 

The following passages relate to this sub- 
ject. 

Chap. vii. 

3. "But made like unto 
the Son of God, abideth a 
priest continually" 

8. " And here men that 
die receive tithes ; but there 
he receiveth them of whom 
it is witnessed that he liv- 
eth." 

15. " And it is yet far 
more evident, for that after 
the similitude of Melchise- 
dec there ariseth another 
priest." 

16. "Who is made not 
after the law of a carnal 
commandment, but after the 
power of an endless life" 

17. "For he testifieth 
thou art a priest forever 
after the order of Melchise- 
dec." 



3 a<pwf/ioiw|xsvo£ (5s 7w 

sig 7o &'/jvsxs£. 

8 xol\ go(5c fjisv Ssxalag 
atfoQvridxovleg av&guxoi 
Xafju/3avHtfiv sxsi <5s, 

(Xag7l)£S^SV0£ oil ^Y}. 

15 xai <irs gitftfolspov sli 
xalaSr\Kov etiiv, si xara 
1y\v o/xojo77j7a MsX^itfs- 
Ssx avigalai isgevg sis- 

16 fe x xara vo/jlov 
sv7oX*]S (fcLgxixrig ysyovsv 
ocXXa xara Suvajwv 
£wrjg axa<raXv<ra. 

17 Ma£7u£Si yaf, o7i 
tfu Ispsus sis 7ov aiwa 
xa<ra <r/jv <ra|jv MsX- 
-^KfsSex. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 95 



23 xai 01 fxsv irXsiovsg 
l\<S\ ysyovolsg \spsi$, Siol 

24 6 6b Sia <ro /jlsvsiv 
aurov sis tov oucova, 
arfagcLf3arov s^si r/xv 



23, " And they truly were 
many priests, because they 
were not suffered to con- 
tinue by reason of death." 

24. "But this man be- 
cause he continueth ever 
hath an unchangeable priest- 
hood." 



When the meaning of one word is fixed, the 
passages cited above will be perfectly perspi- 
cuous. In the ex. psalm God is represented 
as declaring with an oath that his Son should 
be a priest, dSi* 1 ?, which Paul translates m tov 
ajc^a, or as it is in our common version " For- 
ever." But it is well known, that neither the 
Hebrew, nor the Greek term, uniformly signify 
duration strictly eternal ; but frequently defined 
portions of duration. Two or three appro- 
priate quotations will place the meaning of 
these words in the clearest light, according to 
their application in the ex. psalm, and in the 
passages cited from the vii. chapter of the epis- 
tle to the Hebrews. 

Exod. xii. 17. " And ye shall observe the 
feast of unleavened bread : for in this self-same 



96 PRIESTHOODS OF 

day have I brought your armies out of the land 
of Egypt : therefore shall you observe this day 
in your generations by oVty npn, vop.ip.ov aiwviov,* — 
an ordinance forever" That is by an ordi- 
nance continuing during the dispensation estab- 
lished by the Horeb covenant. 

Exod. xl. 15. " And thou shalt anoint 
them," (the sons of Aaron)" as thou didst anoint 
their father, that they may minister unto me 
in the priest's office, for their anointing shall 
surely be — dSw n^nD^, xs i ^ a — ^1*****6 W 7ov aiwva* — 
an everlasting priesthood throughout their gene- 
rations." That is, a priesthood throughout 
that dispensation. 

I. Chron. xxiii. 13. " And Aaron was sepa- 
rated, that he should sanctify the most holy 
things, he and his sons — chwrw — £us aiw%*—for 
ever, to burn incense before the Lord, to minis- 
ter unto him, and to bless his name dSijtw — &* 
oti WV og # — forever" 

Now comparing these citations with the 
ex. psalm, and the vii. chapter of the epistle 
to the Hebrews, we collect that Melchisedec's, 
Aaron's and Messiah's priesthoods were dV? 

* Septuagint. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 97 

— sig cov muva — everlasting priesthoods : that is, 
priesthoods continuing throughout their dispen- 
sations respectivel) r ; though these dispensations 
were of very unequal duration. Of the truth 
of this representation there can be no doubt 
whatever : indeed it is impossible that it should 
be false, because it resolves itself into two 
matters of fact. The first fact, is that Mel- 
chisedec, Aaron, and Messiah, had each a 
priesthood thvjb, si$ tov oiwya, for ever : of this the 
language of the divine Spirit is the evidence. 
The second fact, is that these priesthoods were 
of very unequal length : Melchisedec's lasting 
only during his own life j Aaron's lasting dur- 
ing the Horeb covenant, say from his con- 
secration at Mount Sinai till the burning of 
the temple at Jerusalem by Vespasian; but 
Christ's lasting from his incarnation to eternity. 
Now whenever terms expressive of duration, 
are applied to the offices or official functions 
of these priests, such terms must be under- 
stood relatively to their respective dispensa- 
tions. With this idea in view, let us proceed 
to compare the synonymous expressions on this 
subject. 



98 



PRIESTHOODS OF 



x. 1. The Jewish priests 
offered up sacrifices year by 
year continually. 



Sl$ TO <5lf/rtjSXS£. 



vii. 3. Melchisedec abideth ) 

77 > sis to o^vsxsg. 

a priest continually. j 

That is the priesthood and ministration of 
Melchisedec continued throughout his dispen- 
sation, and the priesthood and ministrations 
of the Levitical priests continued throughout 
their dispensation. But who would infer that 
their dispensations are of equal duration. 



2. 

vii. 16. Jesus was not 
made a priest " after the law 
of a carnal commandment :" 
— viz., the law of the Jewish 
priesthood. 



i S XOLTOL VOfAOS (fapxiXYis 
svtoXtjs y'syovsv. 



vii. 23. The Jewish priests "^ 
were many, " because they I 8m to davaru xwXustf- 
were not suffered to continue f <«» «*!Wwm. 
by reason of death." J 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 99 

vii. 8. Among the Levites 1 
" men that die," received > a<iro6vn<fxovTe$ wtpmot. 
tythes. 7 

The law of the Jewish priesthood was 
similar to, and founded upon, the law of man's 
animal nature; or, in the apostle's language, 
it was " the law of a carnal commandment." 
For as, by the law of man's animal nature, 
one generation dies, and is succeeded by ano- 
ther ; so, by the law of the Levitical priest- 
hood, the death of a priest made room for a 
successor. Hence under that law no priest 
was permitted to continue throughout the 
whole dispensation, " by reason of death :" 
being mortal men they died, and transmitted 
their priesthood to successors. But Jesus was 
not made a priest after the similitude of that 
law ; for then, officiating only during a part 
of his dispensation, he must have surrender- 
ed up his priesthood into the hands of a suc- 
cessor. 

3. 

vii. 3. Melchisedec " abid- ) 
eth a priest continually. J ^«<^^« 



100 PRIESTHOODS OP 

vii. 8. It is testified of him ) 
"thatheliveth." ^W^,£,. 

vii. 17. After his simili- 
tude Jesus is made a priest \ efe rov aiwva. 
" for ever." 

vii. 16. And therefore he 

, " v . f xura Svvaixiv Puyis uxu- 

is a priest " according to > , - ■ *■ 
the power of an endless life." 



vii. 24. " But this priest") 
(Jesus) because he continu- I „ 

v y >sig /ov otiwvoc ottfapapa- 



ysig 7ov otiwvoc aitayctfioL' 

eth ever hath an unchange- | _, c ^ e , _ \ ma J^ u 
able priesthood." J 



fc> I TOV £")(Sl <T7\V ]egO<fW7)V. 



In the foregoing class of quotations, Paul 
was seen demonstrating the contrast between 
the priesthoods of Jesus and of Aaron. In 
the class now under review, we behold him 
drawing the parallel between Jesus's priest- 
hood and Melchisedec's. And the similitude, 
in the latter instance, is as marked and strik- 
ing, as the contrast is in the former. Melchi- 
sedec was a priest (sig ™ aiwva) through a whole 
dispensation: according to the power (&ns 
axa7aXurs) of an endless life, that is, a life not 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 101 

ending during the dispensation. It is there- 
fore testified truly of him (J« £*)) that he liveth 
to the end of his dispensation : and abideth 
a priest (^ ™ Sr^sxsg) continually throughout 
that dispensation. After the order, pattern, 
or similitude, was Jesus constituted a priest. 
And because he is a priest (*s rov aiwva) for 
a whole dispensation, he hath (a^apa^arov <njv 
ispotfuvrjv) an unchangeable, or intransmissible 
priesthood, one which will never descend to a 
successor. 

It is hoped that the subject has been placed 
in a clear and satisfactory view. A solici- 
tude, which may perhaps be smiled on as 
finical, has been shown to place the phrases 
of kindred sense side by side, that they might 
interchangeably irradiate each other, iind the 
one, simple, meaning which they convey is 
the proof of the justness of our interpretation. 
The phrases which have suffered much by crit- 
icism are those, which respect Melchisedec. 
The phrases (eis tov aiwva) "for ever" — (fjuevsi 
kfeus ei$ to Sirivsxsg) " abideth a priest continually" 
— (f«*£TU£Sf/,svos ot< £rj) " of w T hom it is witnessed 

that he liveth — (xocra £uva/Aiv £or]£ axaraXtiT*, as it re- 
spects Melchisedec) " according to the power 
of an endless life." These phrases have all 
9* 



102 PRIESTHOODS OF 

suffered distortion from one hand or another. 
Their true signification has been given above. 
But if any one should yet doubt v let him try 
to give them any other sense whatever, which 
will not terminate in a direct falsehood. 

Was Melchisedec a living man when Paul 
wrote his epistle to the Hebrews ? No. And 
I hope no man will display the folly of call- 
ing for the evidence. Paul therefore could 
not mean by the phrases " according to the 
power of an endless life," and "of whom it 
is witnessed that he liveth," to assert that 
Melchisedec was a living man when he wrote, 
unless he meant to assert what was not true. 

Does he yet live and officiate as a priest ? 
If so, it must be in heaven: but it required 
better blood than ever Melchisedec shed, or 
than ever ran in his veins, to enter into the 
Holy place in heaven, " there to appear in the 
presence of God for us." By the phrases, 
therefore, of being a " priest for ever" and 
of " abiding a priest continually," Paul could 
not have intended to assert so gross a false- 
hood, and one so contrary to the argument 
of his epistle, and so injurious to the honour 
of his Lord, as that Melchisedec was offici- 
ating in the priest's office, at the throne of 
grace in the heavens. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 103 

Will it be said the scriptures are silent as 
to this man's death ; and that, that is the same 
thing as to assert that he liveth ? Strange ! 
Not to make mention of a man's death is the 
same thing as to witness that he liveth ! But 
then remark the consequence ; for if the man 
be really dead, the witness is false. 

The simple fact is, the man was dead, and 
his priesthood had expired with him: but as 
he lived a priest throughout a whole dispen- 
sation of grace, he was a type o£ Messiah, 
who is the sole priest in his dispensation: 
whereas the Jewish priests dying and trans- 
mitting their office to successors, were not 
such types of Messiah, who hath " an intrans- 
missible priesthood," as was Melchisedec. 

V. Of the dignity of Melchisedec's priest- 
hood. 

VII. 4. " Now consider how great this man 
was, unto whom even the patriarch iVbraham 
gave the tenth part of the spoils," 5. " And 
verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who 
receive the office of the priesthood, have a 
commandment to take tythes of the people 
according to the law, that is of their breth- 



104 PRIESTHOODS OF 

ren, though they come out of the loins of 
Abraham." 6. " But he, whose descent is not 
counted from them, received tythes from Abra- 
ham, and blessed him that had the promises." 
7. " And without all contradiction the less is 
blessed of the better." 8. "And here men 
that die receive tythes, but there he received 
them of whom it is witnessed that he liveth." 

9. And, as I may so say, Levi also who re- 
ceiveth tythes, payed tythes in Abraham." 

10. For he was yet in the loins of his father 
w r hen Melchisedec met him." 

But who could be greater than Abraham, 
the friend of God, so celebrated for his faith, 
the father of the faithful, the root of God's 
church, and progenitor of Messiah? It was 
perhaps a desire of finding a man, whom they 
need not blush to own as superior to their 
father Abraham, that made the Jews pitch 
on Shem, for the Melchisedec of Moses and 
David. They were certainly too much elated 
with ideas of the dignity of the Abrahamic 
race, and of the civil and religious institutions 
bestowed on it. Gratitude to God, should 
have been combined with humility. But pride 
destroyed humility, and dethroned gratitude: 
the singularity, more than the value of their 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 105 

religious institutions, gratified: of the latter 
they had formed a very erroneous estimate; 
but this much they knew, that their religion 
distinguished them from all other nations. It 
also happened to them, as to all mankind, 
that the external apparatus and forms of their 
religion, as more visible to the carnal eye, 
and observable with greater ease and less 
sacrifice of passion, concentrated their zeal, 
more than the spiritual essence of its princi- 
ples. Hence they could tolerate a degradation 
of their Messiah, sooner than a sentiment 
which seemed to breathe disrespect to the 
external pomp and splendour of their typical 
system. The priesthood of Jesus, because it 
implied a deficiency, and want of merit, in 
the Levitical priesthood, was publicly disgust- 
ing. On this account Abraham, and Levi, 
must be let down to their proper level ; that 
Messiah may ascend to his supereminent dig- 
nity. Melchisedec was superior to them both. 
There is no evidence that this man was 
either a more pious man, or a mightier prince 
than Abraham. But he was priest of the 
most high God ; and in this official character 
was Abraham's superior. This is all the 
superiority Paul meant to ascribe to him, as 



106 PRIESTHOODS OF 

appears from his confining himself to the 
priestly actions of receiving tythes, and bless- 
ing Abraham : " and without all controversy 
the less is blessed of the better," and the 
inferior pays tythes to the superior. But this 
was the severest stab he could give to the 
imaginary importance of the Levitical priest- 
hood. Had Melchisedec reigned over half 
the globe, or had he excelled Moses in reve- 
lations and miracles, his superiority in these 
respects would have been nothing to the pur- 
pose : a Jew might admit the whole, and after 
all stickle for the supremacy of his priesthood. 
But when Melchisedec, in the character of a 
priest, is exhibited as superior to Abraham 
even after he had received the covenant charter 
of his race's dignity; the Jewish priesthood 
sinks, not only beneath that of Messiah, but 
beneath that of Melchisedec: so far from 
bearing a competition with the real priesthood, 
it is not even the first of types. 

We may conceive the apostle conveying 
the amount of his argument to his country- 
men, in terms such as these: While, from 
an overweening valuation of your priesthood, 
you are ready to reject the priesthood of Jesus, 
do you imagine that yours is the only, or 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 107 

even the noblest priesthood, that ever existed 
among men. Look back to the origin of your 
nation, and there you will find your father 
Abraham, after he had received the covenant, 
which is the source and sum of all your na- 
tional glory, paying tythes to Melchisedec, a 
priest of the Most High God, and receiving 
his blessing. And as he was at that time 
your covenant head and representative, his act 
was yours, and his inferiority your inferiority. 
And therefore to speak plainly (wg s-og miv) your 
whole nation, and among the rest the tribe 
of Levi, who boast their priesthood, paid tythes 
in Abraham to Melchisedec, his superior, and 
theirs: and bowed farther to that superior 
man, by receiving his blessing; for "without 
all controversy the less is blessed of the bet- 
ter." After the model of that man's noble 
priesthood, God hath sworn to raise up the 
priesthood of his son : and be not chagrined, 
my brethren, that your covenant God, who 
hath always consulted for your nation, better 
than ever it consulted for itself, hath raised 
up the priesthood of Jesus, not according to 
the less worthy order of Aaron, but accord- 
ing to the more worthy order of Melchise- 
dec. 



108 PRIESTHOODS OF 

There is one passage more relating to the 
superiority of Jesus's priesthood over that of 
Aaron, which, because it is too plain to need 
illustration, we shall merely cite — 

vii. 20 — "And inasmuch as not without an 
oath he was made a priest;" 21. ("For those 
priests were made without an oath; but this 
with an oath, by him that said unto him, 
the Lord sware and will not repent, thou art 
a priest forever after the order of Melchise- 
dec") 22. "By so much was Jesus made a 
surety of a better testament." 

But waiving farther discussion, we shall 
close by a statement of the typical points in 
Melchisedec's character, and by placing op- 
posite to them the analogous particulars in 
the character of Jesus, the high priest of our 
profession. A simple statement is all that 
shall be given here, the illustration has been 
seen in the antecedent parts of the discourse. 

VI. Comparison between Melchisedec and 
Jesus Christ. 



MELCHISEDEC. 

1. Was a King- 
priest. 



JESUS CHRIST. 
1. Is a King-priest. 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 



109 



2. Was a Righteous 
king-priest. 

3. Was a King-priest 
in Salem, a city, the 
name of which signifies 
Peace. 

4. Was not a Levi- 
tical priest: — had no 
genealogy in the tribe 
of Levi ; his father's 
name, his mother's 
name, — the time of his 
birth, the time of his 
death; are not enter- 
ed in the Levitical re- 
cords. 

5. Was a priest for 
a whole dispensation ; 
and lived, and minis- 
tered, from the begin- 
ning of that dispensa- 
tion to the end of it. 

6. Was greater than 
Abraham after he had 
received the covenant 

10 



2. Is a Righteous 
king-priest. 

3. Is a King-priest 
in the church of God, 
which is a peaceful 
community. Rom. xiv. 
17. 

4. Is not a Leviti- 
cal priest: "for it is 
evident that our Lord 
sprang out of Judah; 
of which tribe Moses 
spake nothing concern- 
ing priesthood." 



5. Is a priest for 
a whole dispensation; 
And, because he conti- 
nued from the begin- 
ning to the end of it, 
hath an intransmissible 
priesthood. 

6. Is greater than 
Abraham and his race, 
greater than the Levi- 



110 



PRIESTHOODS OF 



and promises, and of 
consequence was great- 
er than all the posterity 
of Abraham : received 
tythes from Abraham 
and blessed him, and of 
consequence received 
tythes from all his pos- 
terity, and from Levi 
among the rest; and 
blessed them. 



tical priests, on many 
accounts; among the 
rest, for this, that he 
was made a priest after 
the more honourable 
order of Melchisedec, 
and constituted by the 
oath of God ; receives 
the tythes of his church- 
es adoration, and bless- 
es the whole family of 
faith. 



This then is the interpretation of the pas- 
sages of scripture respecting Melchisedec, 
which is now submitted to the reader's candid 
consideration, in hope of a favourable recep- 
tion, provided the main argument shall be 
found perspicuous and conclusive. Whatever 
may be its demerits in other respects, one 
merit it has : it is simple, and as remote from 
all refinement and mysticism, as can well be 
imagined. All ofher interpretations, which 






JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. Ill 

we have seen, are mystic, involved, inconsist- 
ent, and inconceivable. This interpretation 
carries us consistently through every step of 
the apostle's argumentation, and gives clear- 
ness and precission to every syllable of the 
scriptural phraseology. All others destroy the 
argument, and render the phraseology foolish. 
But the reader will judge. 

It is impossible, however, to conclude, with- 
out animadverting on the extreme anxiety, 
which the apostle displays on this theme of 
our Lord's priesthood. He calls into opera- 
tion all those mighty powers of mind with 
which God had armed him, and all the know- 
ledge of Jewish and Christian theology, which 
he possessed, to defend this doctrine against 
all the forms of opposition. The man who 
marks his movements sees that the motto on 
his banner is death or victory. It is not 
every cause that could claim so much. But 
truly the apostle did not manage a local or 
transient litigation : it was the subject of hu- 
man redemption that he pleaded: the benig- 



112 



PRIESTHOODS OF 



nity of deity, the salvation of man, and the 
glory of Jesus, were at stake. Even the pas- 
sages of scripture, which have been brought 
forward in this dissertation, will have evinced 
that the priestly atonement of Messiah was, 
in all ages, and under every dispensation of 
grace instituted for sinful men, the very same 
thing, which it was in Paul's day, and is at 
this hour, the basis of a saint's faith — the 
concentrated essence of religion. Look from 
Abel to Melchisedec, and from Melchisedec 
to Aaron, and you scarcely find one single 
instance of a worshipper of the true God, but 
it is at the altar, and shedding the blood of 
atonement. But when you have arrived at 
that prodigious combination of civil and reli- 
gious polity, which God formed at Sinai for 
his beloved nation, there you find the animal 
creation with their veins sluiced, and the fire 
burning night and day on God's altar, send- 
ing up to heaven the incessant volume of 
sacrificial smoke, a sweet smelling savour to 
the Lord : while a whole family, increasing 
with the population of the community, serve 






JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 113 

at that altar ; and one tribe out of twelve are 
consecrated to the various services of the 
priesthood. 

And why all this ! Strip sacrifice of typi- 
cal reference, make it an ultimate duty of 
religion, and then let the wit of man say one 
rational thing in its favour. Is it that the 
Father of Mercies delights in the agonies and 
groans of his expiring creatures, and feasts 
only on blood ! Was it out of lenity that he 
levied so burdensome a tax on his beloved 
people, and then burnt it to ashes! Where 
was the policy worthy of Moses, to mention 
no higher name, in subtracting from the na- 
tional wealth and industry the labour of so 
many hands ! And why, of all things, should 
the whole nation be called from their homes 
and occupations, three times in the year, to 
behold their flocks and herds reduced to smoke 
and ashes ! But make the ordinance emble- 
matical, let these priests and their bleeding 
victims, represent Jehovah's high priest, ex- 
piating the sins of his people by his blood, and 
10 * 



114 PRIESTHOODS OF 

obtaining access for them into the presence 
of the Father of Mercies, and all becomes 
glorious ; worthy of God, and consolatory to 
men. Jehovah, offended at sin, is exhibited 
as appeased by the sacrifice of his Son : and 
sinners, placing faith in the blood and inter- 
cession of their high priest, "come boldly 
unto the throne of grace, that they may ob- 
tain mercy, and find grace to help in time of 
need. 

But leaving the law, the gospel system is to 
be looked to as the consummation of religion 
in every respect : and whatever darkness may 
have prevailed in the antecedent dispensations, 
we are entitled to expect that a dispensation 
introduced by the personal ministry of the 
Son of God, and completed by his apostles 
under a full unction of the Holy Ghost, will 
dispel it all, and leave the doctrine of human 
salvation as luminous as it ought to be, or 
indeed can be. And if redemption by the 
blood of atonement be indeed the doctrine of 
salvation, it will not be thrown behind a veil, 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 115 

nor sketched in the back ground of the paint- 
ing, diminished and obscure; but will stand 
forth the prominent figure, to strike every eye, 
and enrapture every heart. This is exactly 
what has taken place. When John the Bap- 
tist pointed out the Messiah to his disciples, 
it was thus, " Behold the Lamb of God which 
taketh away the sin of the world" When our 
Lord spoke of redeeming his people, his life 
was the price which he proposed to pay for 
them. And it is apparent to the most tran- 
sient reader of the apostolic writings, that 
redemption by the blood of Jesus was the bur- 
den of their preaching. And be it noted, that 
this doctrine was far from being popular in 
that age: it was then as obnoxious to the 
scoffs and scorn of various classes of men, as 
ever it has been since: and nothing but its 
truth, and fundamental importance, can acquit 
the apostles from the charge of folly in bur- 
dening their moral system with so repulsive a 
doctrine. To the Jews it was a stumbling- 
block, to the Greeks it was foolishness ; yet 
these men determined to know nothing among 



116 PRIESTHOODS OF 

either of them save " Christ crucified." And 
to say no more, the priesthood of Jesus, and 
its sole efficacy in bringing salvation to sinful 
men, is the theme of this epistle, a theme pro- 
fessedly stated for accurate discussion. And 
surely there is not, in all the book of God, 
another subject more copiously or solemnly 
argued. The consecration of Jesus to the 
priesthood, the sacrifice which he offered, his 
intercession founded on that sacrifice; the 
efficacy of that sacrifice in purging sin, in puri- 
fying the conscience, in obtaining reconcilia- 
tion, in destroying him that hath the power of 
death, in conducting many sons to glory ; and 
the dreadful consequences of treading under 
foot the Son of God, and counting the blood 
of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, 
an unholy thing — In what terms are they not 
portrayed ! 

And indeed if Christ's atonement, w r ith its 
associated doctrine, the application of his 
blood to the conscience by the Holy Spirit, be 
denied; all the religion that ever God re- 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 117 

vealed to sinful men is swept clean away. 
All the sacrificial blood shed by the Patriarchs 
is nothing : the Jewish priests with their tor- 
rents of sacrificial blood are nothing: the 
doctrine of salvation by the blood of Jesus, 
taught by himself, and by all his apostles, is 
nothing : and this epistle certainly worse than 
nothing: because, after a prodigious parade 
of zeal and argument, it proves just nothing 
at all. The river which watereth the Para- 
dise of the church is dried up in all its streams: 
the flowers wither, and the trees shed their 
immature fruit. Say not we have still left 
us the doctrine of the resurrection ! It is 
not an escape from the grave, but admission 
into the presence of a reconciled God, that 
we want. Say not, that even after the doc- 
trine of atonement is set aside, we have ex- 
cellent rules of morality ! What avails it, 
with regard to our eternal condition, since 
by the deeds of the law no flesh living shall 
be justified in the sight of God. And even 
in regard to the present life, what injury 
must our morality suffer, by being cut off 



118 PRIESTHOODS OP 

from approaching the throne of grace, " that 
we may obtain mercy, and grace to help in 
the time of need !" After we shall have re- 
nounced the doctrine of redemption by the 
blood of Jesus, is there no danger that our 
morality will degenerate into the fretting 
metaphysics of moral speculation ; questions 
about utility, and sympathy, and selfishness, 
and benevolence, and all that endless subtility ? 
But even admitting that practical morality 
should, as in many instances it certainly does, 
exist without faith in the Redeemer's blood; 
it will merit inquiry how much of that mo- 
rality is the legacy of parents, whose con- 
sciences were purged by that precious blood ; 
how much of it is the mere habit of the age ; 
how much of it, the prudence of the man, 
who, from one cause or another, finds it a 
point of worldly prudence to maintain a vir- 
tuous carriage. It may not be useless to 
trace this morality in another direction; and 
to ask how much of it springs from the love 
and fear of God, by what hopes it is cheered, 
by what motives it is prompted : for even 






JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 119 

they who possess it can hardly say with the 
apostle "The love of Christ constraineth us, 
because we thus judge, that if one died for 
all then were all dead: and that he died for 
all that they which live should not henceforth 
live unto themselves, but unto him which 
died for them and rose again."* But inquiries 
of the sort alluded to each man must make 
for himself. It is not for us to usurp the 
province of judging the motives of any man's 
virtuous conduct. Besides, indeed, we have 
better evidence of the connection between 
the doctrine of atonement and practical right- 
eousness, than could result from the analysis 
of apparent virtues, were that analysis much 
more practicable, than, happily for mankind, 
it is found to be: broad evidence, collected 
from the whole surface of the moral world. 
In what nation did practical virtue ever dis- 
tinguish the general character, till the doctrine 
of Jesus's atonement went before and sowed 
the seeds ? From what country has this doc- 
trine taken its flight, without carrying with 

* 2 Cor. 14, 15. 



120 PRIESTHOODS OF 

it the purity and dignity of Christian morals, 
while immediately on its departure, the abom- 
inations of heathen depravity have sprung up 
like indigenous briars and thorns, weeds and 
poisons; presenting to the eye the horrible 
prospect of a land from which God has with- 
drawn his blessing, and left the original curse 
to its uncontrolled operation ? Cast your 
eyes over Christendom, and point with your 
finger to any church you please. I ask what 
was the golden age of that church? Was 
it not the age when the atonement of Jesus 
stood prominent in her creed, was proclaim- 
ed from her pulpits, was lisped by her babes, 
and dropped like honey from the lips of all 
her members? What w r as her silver age? 
Was it not that in which this doctrine, not 
yet forgotten, fell into disuse and neglect; 
and preachers instead of endeavouring to raise 
the practical virtues from faith in the Saviour's 
blood, like clusters from the vine; began to 
demoralise the age by the abstractions and 
prettinesses of moral declamation ? Pursuing 
the allusion, you have the brazen age, when 



JESUS CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 121 

doubt and denial of this doctrine became 
fashionable and common. And its general 
rejection gives the age of iron. 

Protinus irrupit vense pejoris in cevum, 
Omne nefas : fugere pudor, verumque fidesque : 
In quorum subiere locum fraudesque dolique, 
Insidiasque, et vis, et amor sceleratus habendi. 

Hard steel succeeded then ; 



And stubborn as the metal were the men. 
Truth, modesty, and shame, the world forsook ; 
Fraud, avarice, and force their places took. 

Would you reform that age, bring back 
the atonement. You never can have a Wick- 
HfFe, a Luther, a Calvin, or a Knox, with- 
out it. One thing in respect to this doctrine 
is really strange, that while we are told by 
tne wise men of this world, that it is mysti- 
cal, and absurd, and even that it is not found 
in the scriptures, rude and untutored minds, 
without reading any other books than the 
scriptures, have drunk it in, in all ages and 
countries : and with it, have also drunk in 
the principles of the most ardent piety, pure 
morality, and mental cultivation. 
I 11 



122 PRIESTHOODS OF CHRIST AND MELCHISEDEC. 

If the present dissertation shall be found 
to have cast a ray of light on those passages 
of scripture, which have passed under con- 
sideration; it is hoped that by disentangling 
them from unjust criticisms, and injurious 
imputations, it may be of some service to 
the general theme of our Lord's priesthood. 






A SKETCH 

OF THE 

LIFE OF JESUS CHBIST, 

FROM 

HIS BIRTH TILfe THE COMMENCEMENT OF HIS 
PUBLIC MINISTRY. 

The particular year, and the particular time 
of the year, in which our Lord was born, have 
not been ascertained with infallible certainty. 
The number of Christians was for a long time 
inconsiderable, in comparison with the heathens 
among whom they resided ; they would there- 
fore of necessity conform in all their civil trans- 
actions to the modes of computing time used in 
their respective countries. Satisfied with the 
general fact of the birth, death and resurrection 
of Jesus Christ, they do not seem to have placed 
any particular value on the chronology of these 
events, nor to have felt the ambition of origi- 
nating a new era. 

It was not till the beginning of the sixth cen- 
tury that the vulgar christian era was intro- 
duced, by Dionysius Exiguus, a learned monk 

and abbot at Rome ; since that period, our pre- 
cis) 



124 A SKETCH OF THE 

sent mode of computing time has diffused itself 
over all those countries which have embraced 
the christian faith. Any mistakes which may 
have been adopted at the establishment of this 
epoch, are now incurable ; nor is the evil of suffi- 
cient magnitude to justify the inconveniences 
of innovation. It may be mentioned, however, 
that the best chronologers are agreed that our 
Lord was born in the fourth year antecedent to 
the vulgar era; and the particular period of 
that year has been fixed for the month of Sep- 
tember, or the time of the autumnal equinox. 

When we examine the scriptures of the Old 
Testament, we find that the particular charac- 
teristic of the ancient religion was the hope of 
a Messiah, or an anointed Saviour, who should 
in due time be sent into the world by God, to 
shed back efficacy upon the religious institu- 
tions of the antecedent times, and to establish 
an uniform and immutable religion for the whole 
human family. The prophets, whose writings 
compose the Jewish code of religion, are re- 
markable for the precision with which they 
define the person, character and conduct of 
Messiah, that, when he should appear, mankind 
might not be embarrassed with any doubts re- 
specting his identity. His character will be 
more fully developed, when we shall have traced 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 125 

him through the whole of his earthly career ; 
but, previously to treating of his birth, it may be 
necessary to mention the three following cha- 
racteristics of him, as they are very explicitly 
and emphatically detailed by the prophets ; 
namely, that he should be the son of woman, a 
descendant of Abraham, and of the family of 
king David. The evangelists, though succinct 
in their narrative, have, either intentionally or 
by divine superintendence, marked with preci- 
sion those particulars in the history of Jesus of 
Nazareth, which demonstrate his Messiahship. 

Mary, the mother of our Lord, descended 
from the family of David, by a line which had 
fallen into decay and poverty, was betrothed to 
Joseph, who traced his pedigree to the same 
royal ancestor. When the fulness of time, esta- 
blished by the divine purpose for the appearance 
of Messiah upon earth, had arrived ; God sent 
the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a city of Galilee, 
where Mary dwelt, to announce to her that she 
was the happy woman whom God had destined 
to be the mother of the Saviour of the world. 
And when Mary suggested her state of celibacy 
as incompatible with the fulfilment of the pro- 
mise, the angel informed her that her son was 
not to be an ordinary man, born according to 
the law of human descent; but that he should 
11 * 



126 A SKETCH OF THE 

be the immediate creation of the Holy Ghost, 
born of her as his proper mother, but without a 
human father ; that he should be the son of the 
Most High God ; that his name should be called 
Jesus, because he saves his people from their 
sins ; that the Lord God would give him the 
throne of his father David, that he should rule 
over Jacob for ever, and that of his kingdom 
there should be no end. Farther to encourage 
her faith, he informed her that her cousin Eliza- 
beth had already been six months pregnant ; 
this child of Elizabeth proved to be the famous 
forerunner of our Lord, John the Baptist. 

Shortly after the departure of the angel, Mary 
arose and went on a visit to her cousin Eliza- 
beth. Zacharias, the husband of Elizabeth, was 
a descendant of Aaron, and a priest of the order 
of Abia, one of the twenty-four orders into which 
David had divided the Jewish priesthood ; they 
were both distinguished for piety, and have this 
character given them, that they were righteous 
before God, walking in all the commandments 
and ordinances of the Lord blameless. It will 
be necessary to take up the history of this fa- 
mily six months before the visit of Mary. We 
are informed that they were of advanced age 
and without children ; but that on a certain 
occasion, when Zacharias, who was then on his 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 127 

routine of duty at the temple, went in to burn 
incense before the Lord, leaving the congrega- 
tion without engaged in prayer, an angel of the 
Lord appeared to him, standing on the right 
side of the altar of incense, who addressed him 
in the following manner : " Fear not, Zacha- 
rias : for thy prayer is heard ; and thy wife Eli- 
zabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call 
his name John; and thou shalt have joy and 
gladness, and many shall rejoice at his birth. 
For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, 
and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink ; 
he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, and even 
from his mother's womb. And many of the 
children of Israel shall he turn unto the Lord 
their God. And he shall go before him in the 
spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of 
the fathers unto the children, and the disobe- 
dient to the wisdom of the just,. to make ready 
a people prepared for the Lord." Startled at 
this extraordinary message, and looking more 
to the laws of nature than to the power of God, 
Zacharias dissplays a culpable incredulity, and 
demands a sign of the angel in confirmation of 
the promise. He receives a sign, and one 
which admirably displays the mixture of seve- 
rity and mercy which God measures to human 
frailty ; a severe punishment is inflicted upon 



128 A SKETCH OF THE 

him, and yet the gracious promise is not defeat- 
ed, but confirmed by the infliction, "And the 
angel answering, said unto him, I am Gabriel, 
that stand in the presence of God ; and am sent 
to speak unto thee, and to show thee these glad 
tidings. And behold thou shalt be dumb, and 
not able to speak, until the day that these things 
shall be performed, because thou believest not 
my words, which shall be fulfilled in their sea- 
son."* 

The meeting between Mary and her kinswo- 
man was in the warmth and rapture of more 
than mortal friendship. They mutually knew 
the destination of heaven ; that the one should 
he the mother of Messiah, and the other the 
mother of his forerunner ; the Spirit of God de- 
scended upon them, and they spoke in strains 
of praise to Almighty goodness, which nothing 
inferior to inspiration is capable of uttering. It 
would appear that Mary abode with Elizabeth 
till the birth of her son, who was circumcised on 
the eighth day, and named John. Zacharias 
recovered the use of his speech on the occasion, 
and, being filled with the Holy Ghost, praised 
God, and spoke in raptures of the approaching 
redemption of the world, and of the agency 



* Luke i. 19, 20. 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 129 

which his son should have in preparing the way 
for the great deliverer. 

After her visit of three months to Elizabeth, 
Mary returned home to her own residence in Na- 
zareth. Her appearance soon alarmed Joseph in 
regard to her purity and his own honour; but, 
being a good man, he felt reluctant to expose her 
to the disgrace and civil punishments which the 
Mosaic law had attached to an adulteress: he 
therefore was meditating in his mind to dissolve 
his marriage contract privately, by which means 
he might shield her from indelible ignominy and 
punishment, though nothing could screen her 
from the shame of a daughter who had wrought 
folly in Israel. During this time of painful sus- 
pense to both parties, in which Joseph could not 
ask any explanation of his betrothed wife, be- 
cause her guilt was to his eye apparent ; and in 
which Mary could not offer an explanation, be- 
cause the truth would appear incredible, God 
interposed in mercy to both. An angel of the 
Lord appeared unto Joseph in a dream, saying, 
" Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take 
unto thee Mary thy wife ; for that which is con- 
ceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she 
shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his 
name JESUS; for he shall save his people from 
their sins. Then Joseph being raised from 



130 A SKETCH OF THE 

sleep, did as the angel of the Lord had bidden 
him, and took unto him his wife." Thus was 
Joseph divinely assured of the fidelity of his 
wife; and the character of Mary and her son 
defended against human reproach, till the ac- 
tions of Messiah should place them both beyond 
the reach of human animadversion. 

About this time, Augustus Caesar had issued 
an edict for a general enrolment of the inhabit- 
ants of the land : and Joseph with his wife 
Mary went from Nazareth, the place of their 
residence, to Bethlehem in Judea, the city of 
David, to be enrolled in their proper tribe and 
family. The caravanserai, or public inn where 
they put up, was at the time crowded, owing to 
the concourse of people which the enrolment 
had drawn together ; and as there was no room 
for them in the house appropriated for lodging, 
they were obliged to put up with such accom- 
modations as the place appointed for the recep- 
tion of the beasts of burden furnished them. In 
this humble and obscure situation it was that 
Mary brought forth her son, the first-born, and 
the Saviour of the world ; and, having wrapped 
him in swaddling clothes, laid him in a manger. 
There is something in the humiliations of vir- 
tuous poverty, which excites powerful sympa- 
thies ; especially when the objects have previ- 



": 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 131 

ously been, or afterwards have become, the ge- 
nerous and disinterested benefactors of man- 
kind. The writings of past ages show the 
feelings of mankind, when they considered the 
Son of God, and Saviour of the world, as a help- 
less babe, wrapped in a cloth and laid in a 
manger ; his mother with more than a mother's 
yearnings bending over him ; and his reputed 
father, with feelings which no human father 
ever felt, looking on. It would be easy to give 
scope to sensibility on this subject ; but is not 
the subject beyond the scope of all human 
feeling? 

However lowly the birth of Messiah may ap- 
pear, in the estimation of those for whom the 
pomps and vanities of the world have attrac- 
tions, God prepared a magnificence of display 
on the occasion, worthy of the appearance of 
his only begotten Son upon earth. There was, 
near Bethlehem, a company of shepherds in the 
open fields, tending their flocks during the 
night ; and an angel of the Lord appeared to 
them, diffusing around him the glories of the 
celestial light. The shepherds were terrified, 
but the angel said unto them, Be not afraid, for 
lo ! I bring unto you glad tidings of great joy 
which will be to all people : that unto you there 
is born in the city of David, a Saviour, who is 



132 A SKETCH OF THE 

Christ the Lord. And this shall be a proof of 
the fact; you will find the babe swathed and 
lying in a manger. No sooner was this annun- 
ciation made, than behold a multitude of the 
heavenly host appeared, praising God and say- 
ing : Glory to God in the highest heavens ; and 
on earth peace, and good-will among men. This 
we know, and are sure, is the gospel of Jesus 
Christ, peace between God our creator and his 
rebellious offspring and good-will and harmony 
among our race, xiut oh ! how lamentable the 
thought, that Irtf's divine religion has been made 
the occasion of alienation from God, and of 
strife and bloodshed among mankind. 

As soon as the angels had withdrawn, the 
shepherds agreed to go to Bethlehem, the city 
of David, in order to ascertain the fact ; and 
there they found Joseph, Mary and the new- 
born babe, the Saviour of the world ; and having 
obtained complete satisfaction, they departed, 
and published abroad the whole matter. Eight 
days after the birth of the Saviour, he was, ac- 
cording to the law given to his ancestor Abra- 
ham, circumcised, and named Jesus; that is, 
the Saviour, according to the name which the 
angel had given him before he was conceived. 
It may be remarked here, that while the Saviour 
of the world was an unconscious babe, incapa- 






LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 133 

ble of any voluntary act, his parents submitted 
him to circumcision, and kept him in all the 
ordinances of God. 

As Jesus was a first-born son, it was neces- 
sary that he should be presented unto the Lord 
in the temple, and redeemed by sacrifice : six 
weeks, therefore, after his birth, as prescribed 
in the law of Moses, his parents took him up to 
the temple, for the performance of this ceremo- 
ny, and others prescribed in the law. Every 
day brought forth new scenes of wonder in the 
life of this extraordinary child. There lived at 
that time in Jerusalem an aged man of distin- 
guished piety and devotion, called Simeon, to 
i whom it had been revealed by the Holy Ghost 
" that he should not see death before he had 
seen the Lord's Christ." By the monition of the 
same Spirit, Simeon came into the temple at 
the very time the parents of Jesus were pre- 
senting him to the Lord ; and, taking the babe 
in his arms, he burst out into this sublime ex- 
clamation : " Lord, now lettest thou thy servant 
depart in peace, according to thy word ; for 
mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou 
hast prepared before the face of all people ; a 
light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of 
thy people Israel." This venerable patriarch 
also blessed the parents of our Lord, and said 
12 



l 



134 A SKETCH OF THE 

unto Mary his mother : " Behold, this child is 
set for the fall and rising again of many in 
Israel, and for a sign which shall be spoken 
against ; (yea, a sword shall pierce through thy 
own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts 
may be revealed." Whilst Joseph and Mary 
were absorbed in wonder at these new attesta- 
tions to the dignity of the child, an aged saint 
and prophetess, named Anna, who, notwith- 
standing that she had reached the great longe- 
vity of eighty-four years, " departed not from 
the temple, but served God with fastings and 
prayers night and day," came forward at the 
instant when Simeon had ceased speaking, and 
joined her testimony to his, pointing out Jesus 
to all who were looking for redemption in Je- 
rusalem. After Joseph and Mary had accom- 
plished all things required by the divine law, 
and been favoured with a great enlargement of 
light and consolation, they returned with the 
babe to their own city of Nazareth in Galilee. 

The next circumstance which occurs in the 
history of our Lord is the arrival of the eastern 
Magi at Jerusalem to do him homage. Among 
the Persians there was a class of learned men, 
named Magi, who devoted themselves to the 
study of theology, politics, astronomy, and phi- 
losophy in general ; and were considered as the 



A SKETCH OF THE 135 

interpreters of all laws, human and divine. As 
to the general purposes of their institution, they 
resembled the priests of Egypt, the gymnoso- 
phists of India, the Druids of the Celtic tribes, 
and the Levites among the Jews. These were 
respectively the learned men of these particular 
nations, the fountains and reservoirs of the pub- 
lic wisdom, the instructors and counsellors of 
their countrymen, and the proper candidates 
for all offices and employments requiring supe- 
rior information and wisdom. The religion of 
the Persian Magi is said to have fallen into 
great decay and corruption, till it was reformed 
by the celebrated Zoroaster, or Zerdusht ; who 
is supposed to have been a Jew, both by birth 
and profession, and a servant to one of the pro- 
phets, probably Ezekiel or Daniel. It is ac- 
knowledged that the corrupt eastern doctrine 
respecting two independent eternal principles, 
the one good and the other evil, was rejected 
by Zoroaster ; that he taught that the Eternal 
Being is good, and the author only of that 
which is good ; that the evil principle will 
finally be overpowered, and that good only will 
prevail ; that at the end of the world there will 
be a resurrection of the dead, and a day of 
judgment ; after which the angel of darkness, 
with his disciples, shall be sent into a world of 



136 LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 

their own, where they shall suffer in everlasting 
darkness the punishment of their evil deeds ; 
and the angel of light and his disciples shall go 
into a world of their own, where they shall re- 
ceive in everlasting light the reward of their 
good deeds. The reformation effected by Zo- 
roaster seems to have been founded on true 
scriptural principles, and to display a minute 
acquaintance with the sacred writings of the 
Jews. It is therefore not at all astonishing that 
the Persian Magi, who probably had copies of 
the Jewish Scriptures, as well as intercourse 
with the dispersed Israelites, should cherish, in 
common with all the surrounding nations, the 
hope of a mighty deliverer arising among the 
Jews. 

Some writers, however, suppose that the Ma- 
gians who brought presents to our Lord were 
Arabians. In favour of this opinion, they allege 
that those parts of the Arabian peninsula which 
Ptolemy has named Arabia Felix and Arabia 
Deserta, were anciently called Kedem, or the 
east, as the remaining part of it was called 
Arabah, or the west. They allege, farther, that 
the gifts presented to our Lord were the natu- 
ral productions of eastern Arabia. And they 
account for the expectation entertained by these 
Arabian Magi concerning the appearance of an 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 137 

extraordinary prince in Israel, by the fact that 
Abraham's son Ishmael, and his sons by Ketu- 
rah, had contributed largely to the population 
of Kedem, or eastern Arabia ; and that as these 
all carried with them the religion of Abraham, 
they must have carefully preserved the family 
hope, that a son of Abraham, in the line of 
Isaac, should one day appear as the Saviour of 
the world, and the blessing of all countries. It 
is, however, rather a subject of curiosity than of 
utility, to attempt ascertaining the exact situa- 
tion of the country of those Magi who travelled 
to Jerusalem to pay homage to the infant Sa- 
viour ; the only circumstance that we can ascer- 
tain with any measure of certainty is, that their 
native residence lay at a great distance from 
Jerusalem. 

We are informed that these Magi saw an 
extraordinary star in their own country, which 
they understood to portend the birth of a great 
King in Jerusalem, and that they concluded it 
to be their duty to go and pay him homage. 
The Scriptures have given us only the sketch 
of a few facts respecting these events, which we 
are to interpret and connect together in the 
due exercise of reason. It is apparent, then, 
that what is called a star, in this narrative, was 
not one of those luminous globes which appear 
12* 



138 A SKETCH OF THE 

by night as if fixed in the azure heavens around 
us. It was a new and extraordinary light ; it 
does not seem to have appeared a second time 
to the Magi, till after they had reached Jerusa- 
lem ; on its second appearance, they were trans- 
ported with joy ; and, conducting them on their 
way, it stood over the house where the infant 
Jesus was ; all which circumstances show it to 
have been not a natural, but a supernatural 
phenomenon. It seems to have been a super- 
natural brilliancy occasioned by an angel, like 
that which surrounded the angel who announced 
to the shepherds in the field the birth of Mes- 
siah ; and, in the first instance, it is not impos- 
sible that it was the very same heavenly light 
which appeared to both. We must suppose, 
also, that it required an angelic communication 
to inform the Magi that this light indicated the 
birth of Prince Messiah, as well as to satisfy the 
shepherds on the same point. And, in fine, we 
must conclude that, as the shepherds were di- 
rected to visit Bethlehem in order to behold the 
infant Saviour with their own eyes, a similar 
direction was given to the eastern Magi, with a 
similar intention. 

What time the Magi took in making prepa- 
ration for their journey, or how long they were 
in travelling to Jerusalem, we are not informed ; 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 139 

but it appears that about a year must be al- 
lowed to have intervened between their first 
sight of the star, and their interview with Herod. 
It does not appear from the sacred history, that 
the extraordinary circumstances attending the 
birth of Jesus, or those which occurred at his 
presentation in the temple, had reached the 
knowledge of Herod's court, or excited any in- 
terest or curiosity in that monarch. The facts, 
though very unusual in their nature, were rather 
of a religious than a political aspect, and were, 
therefore, entirely indifferent to men immersed 
in the pursuits and intrigues of ambition. But 
when the Magi with their splendid retinue and 
presents appeared, and inquired, perhaps at the 
court of Herod itself, for the new-born King of 
the Jews, whose star they declared they had 
seen in the east, and were come with costly 
presents to do him homage, the monarch was 
greatly agitated, and all Jerusalem with him. 
As the Jews were living in daily expectation of 
the appearance of their Messiah, and as the 
public opinion was that this Messiah should be 
a mighty prince, who would vindicate the liber- 
ties of his country, and subdue under the domi- 
nion of the Jews those who had formerly tyran- 
nized over them, it was to be expected that the 
news of his birth would alarm Herod for the 



140 A SKETCH OF THE 

stability of his throne, and excite in the bosoms 
of those who hated the tyrant, or who retained 
any sense of national independence and glory, 
the most tumultuous hopes and fears. 

Herod acted on the occasion with his usual 
policy, decision, and disregard of moral princi- 
ple. His first step was to call together the 
grand sanhedrim, consisting of the high priest, 
the chief-priests of the twenty-four orders, and 
other learned men, who composed the supreme 
tribunal in all questions connected with religion. 
When assembled, he proposes to them the ques- 
tion, where Messiah should be born. They in- 
form him that the birth-place of Messiah was 
fixed in prophecy at the city of Bethlehem, in 
the land of Judea, and produce as the ground 
of their decision, the prophecy of Micah: "And 
thou Bethlehem in the land of Judea, art not 
the least among the princes of Judea ; for out 
of thee shall come a governor, that shall rule 
my people Israel" Herod next calls the Magi 
to a private audience, and, dissembling his mur- 
derous purpose, felicitates them and himself on 
the late happy event, and requests that they 
would search for the child, and, as soon as suc- 
cessful, bring him word, that he might go, and 
unite with them in paying homage to the prince 
of the kings of the earth. 



A SKETCH OF THE 141 

The Magi, therefore, rejoicing in their hope- 
ful prospects, departed from Jerusalem, and 
bent their course towards Bethlehem. But as 
Joseph and Mary had returned, immediately 
after the presentation of Jesus in the temple, to 
their usual residence at Nazareth in Galilee, it 
is apparent that a journey to Bethlehem would 
be useless, and a search for Messiah in that city 
unsuccessful. As soon as the Magi had depart- 
ed from Jerusalem, the same friendly star which 
they had seen in their own country appeared to 
them again, to accomplish the work which it 
had before begun, and, guiding them on their 
way to Nazareth, it stood still over the house 
where the babe lay. It is not improbable that 
they encamped by day, their guide being with- 
drawn by God, lest some officious messenger 
should bear news to the king; and pursued 
their journey only by night, when the star ap- 
peared to lead their way. But our interesting 
narrative must not be interrupted by minute 
remarks. 

Having entered the house, the Magi found 
the young child with Mary his mother, and, 
prostrating themselves before him, they did him 
obeisance ; and opening their treasures, they pre- 
sented him their gifts, gold, frankincense, and 
myrrh. Some imagine that they can discover a 



142 LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 

mysterious meaning in the nature of the gifts 
which were presented ; but without entering into 
the discussion of questions of a dubious but not 
important character, it may be sufficient to men- 
tion that it has always been the custom, in the 
eastern countries, to make presents to any great 
man to whom a person is introduced ; that the 
presents of the Magi, gold, frankincense and 
myyrh, were the most costly articles of mer- 
chandise at that time known ; and we may con- 
clude that the amount and value of the present 
was at once proportioned ta the rank of the 
givers, and to the supereminent dignity of the 
personage who received them. It is probable, 
as we mentioned already in respect to the noc- 
turnal appearance of the star, that the occur- 
rences which have been narrated took place in 
the night ; and that the wise men having been 
introduced to the prince of kings, having done 
their obeisance and made their presents, retired 
to rest, purposing to return in the morning to 
Jerusalem to inform Herod of the success of 
their journey. Be this as it may, we are ex- 
pressly told that they were warned by God in a 
dream, by no means to return to Herod ; and 
that they arose and pursued their journey di- 
rectly to their own country, by another way than 
that by which they came. 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 143 

Probably on the same night, an angel of the 
Lord appeared unto Joseph in a dream, and 
commanded him to arise and take the young 
child and Mary his mother, and flee into Egypt, 
and remain there till he should receive further 
orders, for Herod would surely seek the child's 
life. Accordingly he arose, and that very night 
set out for Egypt with Mary and her son. If it 
were proper to interrupt our narrative with 
moral reflections, they crowd upon us on this 
occasion. We shall, however, content ourselves 
with remarking the providence of God, which 
first brought his son into public notice, as the 
king of Israel, by the arrival of these illustrious 
strangers, and, by the presents of gold, frankin- 
cense and myrrh which they bestowed, furnished 
the holy family with the means of bearing the 
expense of their journey into Egypt, and their 
residence in that country. 

Herod, whose object in desiring the wise men 
to bring him back word of the place where they 
should find the babe, was no other than that he 
might murder him, and thus rid himself and his 
successors from the fear of a competitor, had no 
sooner heard that they had hastily returned to 
their own country, treating him with contempt, 
than he was enraged at once with the indignity 
done him, and with increasing fear respecting 



144 A SKETCH OF THE 

the stability of his throne. Determined to stick 
at no atrocity which might afford him security, 
he instantly issued orders, and all the male chil- 
dren who had entered their second year and 
downwards, were put to death, in order that he 
who was born the king of the Jews might not 
escape. This barbarous massacre of the inno- 
cent babes was perfectly in accordance with the 
general character of Herod, in whom great ta- 
lents were united with greater perfidy and cru- 
elty. Before we dismiss this tyrant, it may not 
be amiss to give a slight sketch of his character, 
as an example of that class of monarchs whose 
talents are displayed only in deeds of mighty 
mischief, and who, to the disgrace of mankind, 
are complimented with the epithet Great. In 
early life he was governor of Galilee, under his 
father Antipater. In the civil wars between the 
Roman republic and Caesar, Herod joined the 
party of Cassius, and was made governor of 
Coelosyria. When Mark Anthony arrived vic- 
torious in Syria, Herod and his brother courted 
his favour, and were made tetrarchs in Judea. 
Being driven from Jerusalem by Antigonus, he 
went to Rome, where, beyond his expectation, 
he obtained the crown of Judea from the senate. 
After the battle of Actium, hp visited Augustus 
at Rhodes, who replaced his diadem on his 



A SKETCH OF THE 145 

head, and restored him to his sovereignty. It 
required great abilities to maintain his political 
rank in these stormy and tumultuous times ; but 
his conduct was marked with systematic dupli- 
city, and the most heartless cruelty. In pursuit 
of his ambitious designs, he put to death the 
father, grandfather, uncle and brother of his 
beloved wife, Mariamne ; his two sons by her, 
and a son by a second wife, subsequently shared 
the same fate. When summoned to answer for 
some part of his conduct before Mark Anthony, 
the Roman triumvir, he gave orders to Joseph, 
whom he left as governor of Judea, that in case 
the trial should terminate fatally, he should put 

I Mariamne, Herod's beloved wife, to death. Jo- 
seph discovered the plot to Mariamne, for which 
Herod put him to death ; but the high-spirited 

ji queen was irrecoverably alienated from her un- 
natural husband, whose morbid affection had 
doomed her to death, lest she should fall into 
the hands of another. In fine, Mariamne was 
brought to trial, convicted, and put to death. 
The murder of the innocents of Bethlehem filled 
up the measure of Herod's iniquity. A guilty 
conscience and perpetual conspiracies, preying 
on an exhausted constitution, threw the monarch 
into a mortal disease, which historians have 
represented as a special judgment of heaven for 
ll 13 



146 LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 

the numerous enormities and impieties of which 
he had been guilty. His disorder was attended 
with the most loathsome circumstances that can 
be imagined. As death approached, his hatred 
of mankind grew furious. Numbers fell victims 
to appease the tortures of his mind. The last 
act of his life crowned the ferocious cruelty of 
his character. He had summoned the chief 
persons among the Jews to assemble at Jericho, 
and, when they arrived, had them shut up in the 
circus ; and exacted an oath from his sister Sa- 
lome and her husband that these should all be 
massacred, as soon as he should draw his last 
breath. For this, said he, will provide mourn- 
ers for my funeral all over the land, and make 
the Jews in every family lament my death, who 
would otherwise exhibit no signs of concern. 
This order, however, was not executed. Herod 
died in the thirty-fourth year of his reign, and 
the sixty-eighth of his age ; the first persecutor 
who raised his hand against the Son of God. 
His death followed soon after this act of im- 
piety. 

How long our Lord remained in the land of 
Egypt, we are not informed. But some time 
after the death of Herod, an angel appeared to 
Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise and take the 
child and his mother, and go to the land of Israel, 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 147 

for they who sought the child's life are dead. 
On returning, and finding Herod's son Arche- 
laus, whose character resembled that of his 
father, reigning over Judea in his father's room, 

| he was afraid to settle in that district, and ac- 
cordingly returned to Nazareth in Galilee, a less 
suspicious place, under a less jealous prince. 
The history of several years of our Lord's life is 
summed up by Luke in the following short but 

, expressive sentence : " And the child grew, and 
waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom, and 
the grace of God was upon him." 

The parents of our Lord, who were distin- 

< guished for piety, were in the habit of going up 
to Jerusalem every year for the purpose of ce- 
lebrating the passover, as enjoined in the law ; 
and as it was customary with the Jews to carry 
up their children with them to that feast, as 
soon as they came to years capable of bearing 

j the fatigues of the journey, and competent to 
make moral observations on that great religious 
festival, Joseph and Mary took Jesus with them 
to the passover, which took place immediately 
after the completion of his twelfth year ; that is, 
when he was twelve and a half years of age. 
After the festival had terminated, the parents 
of our Lord, with a great multitude of the in- 
habitants of their town, departed from Jerusa- 



, 



150 A SKETCH OF THE 

the taunts of his enemies, that his father was a 
carpenter, and that he himself wrought at the 
same trade, no doubt contributing his share to 
support the family by honest and honourable 
industry. Had any other writers treated this 
theme, we would have had this long blank filled 
up with very interesting, and in some respects, 
no doubt, very instructive details. The purity 
of our Lord's life, and the dignity of his man- 
ners, would have been celebrated ; the tender 
affection and profound respect with which he 
uniformly treated his parents, would have been 
held up as the standard of filial piety ; the ten- 
derness of his sensibilities, the warmth of his 
friendships, his sympathy with the distressed, his 
promptitude to oblige, his hatred of vice, his 
love of virtue, his delight in human happiness, 
would all have been emblazoned in the most 
glowing colours of the most impassioned elo- 
quence. It certainly could not be from any 
difficulty of collecting the materials for such an 
exhibition of the private character of Jesus, that 
the evangelists have passed over the greater 
portion of his life in profound silence. We 
must, therefore, search for the reason of this 
unusual silence in the nature of their general 
end and design. 

Let it be observed, that it was not the design 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 151 

of any of the evangelists to write the history of 
the life and transactions of Jesus of Nazareth ; 
biography, in the usual acceptation, was not 
their object ; nor was their view limited to the 
exhibiting of the author of their religion, as a 
perfect example of personal piety and virtue, 
for the imitation of mankind. 

The single object which the evangelists had 
in view, was to furnish a historical demonstra- 
tion of the fact, that Jesus of Nazareth is the 
Christ, the Son of the living God. If we keep 
their design distinctly in view, we will perceive 
a propriety and excellence in their writings, 
which would otherwise appear a mass of singu- 
lar confusion. Their notorious disregard of all 
chronological arrangement, shows that they did 
not intend to write history. If they had pur- 
posed to furnish mankind with a gallery of mo- 
ral pictures, like the proverbs of Solomon, they 
would, like Solomon, have given distinctness of 
outline, and individuality of finish, to their 
paintings respectively. This unquestionably 
they have not done ; for although, in some parts 
of the conduct of our Lord, and in some of his 
sermons, moral pictures are presented, which 
may be pronounced perfect and complete in all 
their parts and appendages ; the general cha- 
racteristic of the evangelists, as writers, is, that 



152 A SKETCH OF THE 

they bring together facts and maxims in the 
most desultory manner, and state few things 
except by parts and piecemeal. These remarks 
are not intended to convey, nor in fact do they 
insinuate, the slightest censure on the writers 
of these inspired productions: the particular 
design of a writer, alone, furnishes the key to 
all correct and enlightened criticism on his 
work. If, then, we consider that the intention 
of the evangelists was to prove that Jesus of 
Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of the living 
God ; and if, upon examination, we find that 
there is not a characteristic of the Messiah, 
mentioned in the Old Testament, which one or 
another of these writers has not proved to exist 
in the person and actions, or sufferings, of Jesus 
of Nazareth ; we will be constrained to acknow- 
ledge, that never was a great subject supported 
by more ample demonstration, and that the 
evangelists have acquitted themselves in the 
highest style of excellence, by achieving all that 
they undertook to perform. We shall show the 
correctness of these observations in respect to 
the history of the private life of Jesus, which 
has been the subject of the present chapter. 

Every reader of the New Testament must 
have remarked the particularity and minuteness 
with which the evangelists record the circum- 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 153 

stances attending the birth of Jesus Christ. 
Their precision in this respect cannot fail to 
appear extraordinary, when it is contrasted 
with their total silence respecting his circum- 
stances, conduct and character, from the twelfth 
till the thirtieth year of his life ; a period which 
is generally the most important to the biogra- 
pher, and which is the season when all the pow- 
ers of body and mind are developed, and the 
character formed and established. But the 
wonder will cease when we reflect that all the 
circumstances recorded respecting the birth of 
Christ are characteristic of Messiah, and are 
brought forward expressly to establish our faith 
in that fact. Some of the occurrences are in- 
deed of so extraordinary a nature, that they 
merited a place in history on their own account ; 
but other details into which these writers enter 
are minute, and apparently trivial, and, in the 
introduction of any other biography, would be 
tedious and offensive. We allude particularly 
to the genealogies furnished by Matthew and 
Luke. Yet these genealogies are not unneces- 
sarily or impertinently introduced ; they furnish 
a link in the chain of demonstration, and, in 
conjunction with matters of apparently greater 
importance, contribute to establish the grand 
fact of Jesus's Messiahship. Let us attend to 



154 A SKETCH OF THE 

particular facts in elucidation of our general 
statement. 

The last prophecy in the Old Testament is 
this: " Behold, I will send you Elijah the pro- 
phet before the coming of the great and dread- 
ful day of the Lord; and he shall turn the 
heart of the fathers to the children, and the 
heart of the children to the fathers, lest I come 
and smite the earth with a curse." # We have 
the testimony of our Lord, that John the Bap- 
tist is the person who was foretold under the 
name of Elijah ;f but, as we are at present dis- 
cussing the evidences of his own Messiahship, 
it would be logically improper to urge his de- 
claration as proof in a question, upon the deci- 
sion of which those evidences in part depend. 
We shall therefore take a view of the subject 
not liable to this objection. It is well known 
that the Jews were to a certain extent tainted 
with the eastern philosophy, and that many of 
them held the doctrine of the transmigration of 
souls, according to the theory taught to the 
Greeks by Pythagoras, and the same which 
prevails among the Bramh'uns of India at the 
present day ; and therefore some of the Jews 
said that Jesus was Elias, some Jeremias, and 
others, one of the prophets. The prophecy of 

* Mai. iv. 5, 6. f Matt. xi. 10. 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 155 

Micah, however, pointed not to the literal Eli- 
jah, but to a person who should remarkably 
resemble him in official character ; and the re- 
semblance between Elijah and John the Baptist 
has been owned by all. They were both men 
of independent spirit, energetic intellect, and 
mortified habits ; daring and intrepid, quick to 
discover, and severe to denounce every vicious 
indulgence. They were the two thunderbolts 
of the spiritual war, and, though good men, they 
were rather great than amiable. 

As John the Baptist was a marked object on 
the field of prophecy, there is something extra- 
ordinary in every circumstance of his history. 
His parents, like Abraham and Sarah, were 
childless and superannuated ; an angel foretells 
his birth, a miracle is wrought to chastise his 
father's incredulity, and in due season John is 
born. On the birth of his son, Zacharias, in- 
spired by God, thus prophesies of his future 
character: "And thou, child, shalt be called 
the prophet of the Highest ; for thou shalt go 
before the face of the Lord to prepare his 
ways." 

But it is in the circumstances of Jesus's own 
birth that we must look for the most decisive 
proofs of his Messiahship. Isaiah had prophe- 
sied thus concerning him : " Behold, a virgin 
shall conceive, and shall bring forth a son, and 



156 A SKETCH OF THE 

shall call his name Emmanuel."* The angel 
Gabriel explains this prophecy to Mary in these 
words : " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, 
and the power of the Highest shall overshadow 
thee ; therefore also that holy thing which shall 
be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God."1 
To the same purport, the angel who appeared 
to Joseph in a dream, thus expresses himself: 
" Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take 
unto thee Mary thy wife ; for that which is con- 
ceived in her is of the Holy Ghost ; and she 
shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his 
name Jesus, for he shall save his people from 
their sins. (Now all this was done that it might 
be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by 
the prophet, saying ; Behold a virgin shall be 
with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they 
shall call his name Emmanuel, which being in- 
terpreted, is God with us.)" The angels de- 
scended from heaven to sing the praises of the 
new-born Redeemer, and to direct the shepherds 
in the field to go and hail their king in the city 
of David. They afterwards conducted the east- 
ern Magi from a far distant country, and brought 
them into the presence of the Prince of Peace. 
Thus both Jews and Gentiles were brought to- 
gether by the agency of the angels of heaven, 
to pay their obeisance to him who was born to 

* Isai. vii. 14. f Luke i. 35. 



LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST. 157 

be a light to enlighten the Gentiles, and the 
glory of his people Israel. And Simeon and 
Anna, as if the representatives of their respec- 
tive sexes, spoke of him to all who were seeking 
salvation in Israel. The circumstances connect- 
ed with the birth of Jesus, furnished decisive 
evidence that he was the long-promised Mes- 
siah, and are stated minutely and precisely, for 
the establishment of that important fact. 

But the private life of Christ, from the age 
of twelve till that of thirty years, is not recorded 
by any sacred writer. Private virtues, however 
splendid and honourable to the individual, or 
however beneficial they might become to man- 
kind by being recorded, did not furnish decisive 
evidence that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the 
living God ; and therefore these were all omitted. 
The evangelists were guided in the selection 
of the materials of their compositions by the in- 
fallible Spirit of inspiration ; and therefore we 
are not surprised to find in their simple and art- 
less narratives, a profoundness of design not 
common with other writers. The Messiahship 
of Jesus must be determined by the circumstan- 
ces of his birth, and of his public ministry; and 
the evangelists have acted on the true principles 
of logic in not permitting anything, however 
important it might be in a detached view, to 
mingle with their arguments, except what con- 
14 



158 A SKETCH, ETC. 

tributed to their demonstration. And we think 
we are entitled to conclude from all the circum- 
stances of the case, that it was neither the sole, 
nor yet the main design of these writers, to ex- 
hibit Jesus as a mere pattern of personal virtue. 
Had this been their object, their conduct must 
appear extraordinary and unaccountable. 

Of the infantile virtues of Jesus, they have 
not written so much as would fill a page ; his 
public life, in which an extraordinary character, 
extraordinary relations, actions and sufferings, 
everywhere appear, they have detailed at large ; 
but the greater part of his life, and that which 
lay most level with the condition of mankind, 
and which must have furnished an abundant 
display of the common graces and virtues which 
decorate human nature, they have passed over 
in silence. The only method by which we can 
account for their conduct, is by supposing that 
their main object was to demonstrate the fact 
that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living 
God ; that in the narrative of his public minis- 
try, they found sufficient occasion to exhibit 
him as a perfect example of human virtue ; but 
that they saw in his character, and sought to 
exhibit to others, something of greater dignity 
and importance than even the spotless purity 
of his virtuous example. 

THE END. 



r 

•EB 12 1951 



& 0,%.'" ' A* V- °^.">* </ 









^r Deacidified using the Bookkeeper proces 

V *■ Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

^6<s ^ r r\ Treatment Date: July 2005 

s ^ r % PreservationTechnologiti 

aS <£v „ k A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATiq 

' <% r^~ y , 1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 

s A^ <* ' ' Cranberry Township, PA 16066 

// ^ cP - s s *~- r * "^ (724) 779 " 21 


















3» * 'Kt>. rf. 









G°\ 



<& 






"^c? 



f 



7 - i 






O-, 



■%„<** : 



A G <- ' A G <- ''7. o A^ 






"^o< 



•4 --e-^' 



^ x 



^°- • 












LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 478 862 A $ 



